Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] The place of AI code review in the Linux Kernel process
SJ Park <[email protected]> Sat, 18 Jul 2026 09:15:41 -0700
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.ksummit |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sat, 18 Jul 2026 07:14:02 -0700 Guenter Roeck <[email protected]> wrote: [...] > I do not expect patch authors to fix pre-existing issues in my > scope of responsibility, though I appreciate it if they do it. > I actually asked Roman if it would be possible to add a per-subsystem > prompt to Sashiko's reply. That would let me inform authors that > I do not mandate fixing such issues. I agree such customized review could make it more clear and helpful. But I also concern if it could make Sashiko reply unnecessarily verbose. Especially when a patch is toucing multiple subsystems. In my humble opinion, it is a common sense not asking patch contributors to fix pre-exising issues. Of course it depends, but that's what requires and deserves additional discussions in my opinion. If subsystem-specific rules are really required, maybe we can use subsystem maintainer profile document? For example, DAMON maintainer profile has a section [1] for AI review. And I now realize the document is quite outdated, though. [1] https://origin.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/mm/damon/maintainer-profile.html#ai-review Thanks, SJ [...]