Re: LLM based rewrites

On March 9, 2026 6:57:05 AM PDT, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis=2Eorg> wro=
te:
>On Sat,  7 Mar 2026 21:49:20 +0100
>Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel=2Eorg> wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>
>Hi Christian,
>
>>=20
>> I believe it is a rite of passage to at least once cause a shouting
>> match with a non-technical topic=2E
>>=20
>> It seems increasingly viable to rewrite an entire codebase using an LLM
>> and it currently looks like there's at least some examples as in [1]
>> where people try to use an LLM based rewrite as a clean-room
>> implementation to relicense the project=2E I think the FOSDEM talk at [=
2]
>> is related to this as well=2E
>>=20
>> Maybe this is a "let's worry about it later" situation but I wonder
>> whether this is something that the LF or TAB is actively following=2E
>>=20
>> I'm not asking for a legal analysis=2E I'm mostly looking for reassuran=
ce
>> that we as the kernel community and our representatives have an eye on
>> this=2E I find this quite worrisome=2E
>>=20
>> Fwiw, I was made aware that there's a tangentially related discussion o=
n
>> the distribution mailing list at [3]=2E
>
>Thanks for bringing this up=2E I'll bring this up as a topic for our next
>meeting=2E Although it may not be much we can do about it except be aware=
 of
>what is happening=2E
>
>-- Steve
>
>
>>=20
>> Thanks!
>> Christian
>>=20
>> Link: https://github=2Ecom/chardet/chardet/issues/327 [1]
>> Link: https://github=2Ecom/chardet/chardet/releases/tag/7=2E0=2E0 [1]
>> Link: https://fosdem=2Eorg/2026/schedule/event/SUVS7G-lets_end_open_sou=
rce_together_with_this_one_simple_trick [2]
>> Link: https://lore=2Ekernel=2Eorg/a3f792e918674e208492a077679ae6ffc88ce=
0c9=2Ecamel@gentoo=2Eorg [3]
>
>

It is somewhat hard to see how that would constitute a "clean-room" rewrit=
e=2E A clean-room rewrite entails two teams, one (the "clean" room) which m=
ust be certified to have never seen the code in question, and all communica=
tions between the two teams must be auditable=2E