LLM disclosure (was: [PATCH v2] vfs: remove the excl argument from the ->create() inode_operation)

Jonathan Corbet <[email protected]> Fri, 07 Nov 2025 15:35:17 -0700
Newsgroups gmane.linux.uml.devel,gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.file-systems,gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs,gmane.comp.file-systems.ceph.devel,gmane.comp.file-systems.coda.general,gmane.comp.file-systems.ecryptfs.general,gmane.linux.kernel.efi,gmane.comp.file-systems.ext4,gmane.linux.file-systems.f2fs,gmane.linux.kernel.mm,gmane.linux.drivers.mtd,gmane.linux.nfs,gmane.comp.file-systems.nilfs.user,gmane.linux.hardware.karma.devel,gmane.linux.file-systems.union,gmane.linux.kernel.cifs,gmane.network.samba.internals,gmane.linux.documentation
Message-ID <[email protected]> 
NeilBrown <[email protected]> writes:

> On Sat, 08 Nov 2025, Jeff Layton wrote:

>> Full disclosure: I did use Claude code to generate the first
>> approximation of this patch, but I had to fix a number of things that it
>> missed.  I probably could have given it better prompts. In any case, I'm
>> not sure how to properly attribute this (or if I even need to).
>
> My understanding is that if you fully understand (and can defend) the
> code change with all its motivations and implications as well as if you
> had written it yourself, then you don't need to attribute whatever fancy
> text editor or IDE (e.g.  Claude) that you used to help produce the
> patch.

The proposed policy for such things is here, under review right now:

  https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/

jon