Re: Stop false review statements
Guenter Roeck <[email protected]> Sat, 16 May 2026 05:23:35 -0700
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.sashiko,dev.linux.lists.sashiko-reviews,org.kernel.vger.linux-devicetree,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.workflows |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 5/16/26 05:16, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 16/05/2026 14:11, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 10:05:02AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> What the hell is that: >>> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ >>> >>> As a bot you CANNOT MAKE a Reviewer's statement of oversight. You are >>> not a damn human do be able to make such statement. You are a bot, a tool. >>> >> >> Where exactly do the rules say that ? I seem to miss that. >> >> There is a policy document about _contributions_ made by AI, but I don't >> see the one that says that AI agents must not provide Reviewed-by: tags. > > Quotes from the existing policy: > > 1. "By offering my Reviewed-by: tag, I state that:" > > Tool cannot use first person "I". Tool cannot "state that". > > 2. "A Reviewed-by tag is *a statement of opinion* that the patch is an > appropriate modification of the kernel without any remaining serious" > > Tool cannot make a statement of opinion. > > 3. "Any interested reviewer (who has done the work) can offer a > Reviewed-by". > > Tool is not a reviewer as a person, thus above does not grant the tool > permission to offer a tag. > I'd like to see that explicitly spelled out. Until then it is your opinion. >> >>> Stop faking tags. >>> >>> And really, considering how many false positives Sashiko produces, how >>> poor review comments it gives, how many misleading comments, it's >>> unacceptable to me to consider that a review. >>> >>> Amount of useless noise Sashiko produces already changed my mind how >>> useful that tool is. >> >> We seem to have completely different experiences. Yes, it does produce >> false positives, just like humans do. However, I have seen it find many >> real bugs, including many in patches which already had Reviewed-by: tags >> from (presumably) human reviewers. > > Of course it finds bugs. But it also produces - roughly - 80-90% false > positives, completely useless. > Really ? The ones I have seen are - roughly, to use the same term - 80-90% true positives. Maybe you should explicitly ask for no Sashiko reviews in your scope of responsibility. Thanks, Guenter