Re: AI slop (was Re: [PATCH] mm/huge_memory: let special huge VMAs bypass the THP) policy check

On 6 Aug 2026, at 13:05, John Hubbard wrote:

> On 8/6/26 9:50 AM, Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 06, 2026 at 01:45:17PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 06, 2026 at 04:47:07PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
>>>> Just to be clear: Unchecked AI slop in any form is making my life
>>>> worse every day.
>>>
>>> I think eveyone's life who contributes reguarly to the kernel.. The
>>> only ones who seem to benifit are people doing drive by patches!
>>
>> And they shouldn't - we should make sure that nobody doing this can
>> benefit.
> ...
>>> Yet responsible use of AI seems genuinely helpful and quality improving :\
>>
>> Yes and I use it daily. It's really helpful when kept on a short leash...
>
> haha so true. A *very* short leash! :)
>
>>
>> We're going to have to move to a trust model eventually IMO where random
>> new people just don't get to apply anything until they build trust with
>> smaller changes (and with measures for established people who start
>> sloppping).
>
> That sounds like a good move! It really is all about who sends these patches,
> and what their stance is toward creating patches.
>
> And furthermore, that's not even a change in policy! Because traditionally,
> that's how people started anyway: with small patches and patience. It's

Patience is the key. Seeing patches refreshed within a day is killing me.

> only with AI that they've been able to skip that step, to everyone's
> detriment.
>
> There are some patchsets in my inbox that I instinctively just skipped,
> because they were huge new patchsets from new AIs (not people, really),
> only to watch in dismay as they burned up other people's time in
> review attempts.
>
> thanks,
> -- 
> John Hubbard


Best Regards,
Yan, Zi