linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 v1 0/4] [RUST] Framebuffer driver support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <DG0B57YUZ10G.3KRQYI3MGPXRJ@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2026 23:55:26 +0900
From: "Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@...dia.com>
To: "pengfuyuan" <pengfuyuan@...inos.cn>
Cc: "Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@...e.de>, "Danilo Krummrich"
 <dakr@...nel.org>, "Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, "Daniel Almeida"
 <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>, "Miguel Ojeda" <ojeda@...nel.org>, "Boqun
 Feng" <boqun.feng@...il.com>, "Gary Guo" <gary@...yguo.net>,
 Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, "Benno Lossin"
 <lossin@...nel.org>, "Andreas Hindborg" <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, "Trevor
 Gross" <tmgross@...ch.edu>, "Greg Kroah-Hartman"
 <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
 "David Airlie" <airlied@...il.com>, "Simona Vetter" <simona@...ll.ch>,
 "Helge Deller" <deller@....de>, "Hans de Goede" <hansg@...nel.org>, "Lee
 Jones" <lee@...nel.org>, "Sam Ravnborg" <sam@...nborg.org>, "Zsolt Kajtar"
 <soci@....rulez.org>, Ville Syrjälä
 <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>, <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>,
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
 <linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 v1 0/4] [RUST] Framebuffer driver support

On Tue Jan 27, 2026 at 5:04 PM JST, pengfuyuan wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 07:28:21PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> On Mon Jan 26, 2026 at 7:01 PM JST, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > Am 26.01.26 um 09:17 schrieb pengfuyuan:
>> >> This patch series adds Rust bindings and safe abstractions for the Linux
>> >> framebuffer subsystem, enabling framebuffer drivers to be implemented in Rust.
>> >
>> > The framebuffer subsystem is obsolete and has been deprecated for a 
>> > decade. No new drivers accepted. Anything that really wants fbdev 
>> > already has a driver. Can we please let it die?
>> 
>> This, and the patchset is also obviously AI-generated.
>
> Hi,
> Thank you for the feedback.
> I’d like to be clear about how I used AI in this work:
>
> 1.Cover letter – Yes, I used AI to help summarize and phrase the cover letter.
> 2.Comments in the code – Some comments were written or refined with AI assistance.
> 3.Learning the codebase – When reading and understanding existing Rust-for-Linux code (including DRM and other abstractions), I used AI as a helper to analyze and explain structure and patterns.
> 4.Writing the code – The implementation was not fully generated by AI.  I wrote the code myself and used AI mainly to look up existing abstractions, traits, and APIs (e.g. “how does X work? ”, “what’s the right trait for Y?”)  while I was coding.
>
> So: AI was used for summaries, comments, learning, and looking things up;  the logic and structure of the code are mine, and I take responsibility for them.
> If you have concerns about specific parts (e.g. wording, style, or design), I’m happy to rework those patches or to adjust how I describe tool use in future submissions.

Appreciate the clarification. One piece of feedback if I may.

The cover letter is the first thing reviewers see of your patchset. If
it reads like impersonal, mechanically exhaustive generic AI slop full
of bullet points that doesn't follow kernel conventions, reviewers will
assume the rest of the patchset is of the same caliber and discard it as
something entirely generated by a bot.

A patch is not only the code. Comments and commit logs are as important
and should be given the same care. This patchset is a great illustration
of how AI completely misses the point: it will write 5 dreadful
paragraphs explaining *what* it did, but what reviewers want is one
sentence that explains *why*.

If your use of AI for the commit logs and comments is motivated by a
lack of confidence in your English, how about this: write them in your
native language and ask AI to translate it for you. That's something
LLMs actually shine at (that, and using them to learn about a codebase),
and the translated result will still carry the flow you intended, as
well as your own touch.

In other words, make sure that the AI assists you, as opposed to you
assisting the AI.

Hope this helps. Looking forward to your future submissions.