Re: [PATCH 0/4] Update maintainer-pgp-guide.rst Chinese translation

On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 09:45:26PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> On 8/21/26 9:11 PM, Weijie Yuan wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 08:57:46PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> > > On 8/21/26 8:48 PM, Weijie Yuan wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 08:17:06PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > > > (I definitely won't admit that the log file annoyed me a few times
> > > > > > because I accidentally included it with 'git add .' and then had to 'git
> > > > > > commit --amend' right after) ;-)
> > > > > My experience is to not use 'git add .'. In Linux, hidden files are not
> > > > > listed by default.
> > > > Yes, I was being lazy to type the full pach/full file name, oops.
> > > > 
> > > > While hidden files are not listed by default on Linux, thankfully the
> > > > kernel source tree ignores .* via .gitignore. But 'git add .' is indeed
> > > > a bad habit.
> > > > 
> > > > Btw, git commit -v, or setting commit.verbose = true, can really save
> > > > one at the last minute. (as mentioned in our how-to doc) And sadly I
> > > > actually happened to use another computer to write patches last night,
> > > > which I hadn't configured it. XD
> > > Actually these labor-tensive works should be done by LLM. This is one of the
> > > right directions of LLM usage.
> > > 
> > > You can write a simple skill to help you complete these works.
> > That makes sense. I'll give it a try. Still, given that the kernel
> > community tends to be a bit conservative, I've generally tried to do
> > things myself. Of course, the most important thing is that we supervise
> > what the LLM is doing and make sure it follows our actual intent rather
> > than hallucinating.
> 
> My experience is to always double check the result of LLM.
> 
> However, to be honest, translation is not a complicated task. Sometimes LLM
> proposes greater translation than me.

Aha, yes, I said that in [PATCH 1/4] too. ;-)

> And LLM is really good at capturing some common problems in the patchset.

Yes, agreed.

> > > > > > > > Btw I've been trying to know more about Sphinx and kernel-docs, hope my
> > > > > > > > mistake won't happen again.
> > > > > > > That change can fix problem. The underlying problem is RST syntax. Maybe you
> > > > > > > can have a look at this or query it in the LLM.
> > > > > > Absolutely. I did have relatively little experience writing rst before.
> > > > > > But that's definitely no excuse - I'll try to pick it up quickly.
> > > > > LLM is really useful to capture some syntax and semantics issues. Therefore,
> > > > > before submitting patch, use LLM to scan problem in this issue.
> > > > Got it, thanks.
> > > > 
> > > > > I am writing a draft skill for reviewing patches of kernel Chinese
> > > > > documentation.
> > > > Nice! I've been trying "b4 review tui" these days and I also made some
> > > > modifications to its pre-configured prompt to fit our specific
> > > > workflows:
> > > > 
> > > >     https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/b4/b4.git/tree/misc/agent-reviewer.md
> > > > 
> > > > b4 review tui 'agents' - AI-assisted review:
> > > > 
> > > >     https://b4.docs.kernel.org/en/latest/reviewer/getting-started.html#ai-assisted-review
> > > > 
> > > > Sometimes my agent makes false alarms, but at other times it does manage
> > > > to identify the issues that we have overlooked. This is probably also
> > > > one of the reasons why the community is gradually becoming more
> > > > accepting of LLMs.
> > > Ah, this is interesting.
> > > 
> > > My skill is to use LLM to search the patch name, use b4 to apply patches and
> > > finally ask LLM to refer to how-to.rst and review the patch or patchset.
> > As Chen-Yu mentioned before, I´ve basically trained myself to find
> > almost any email in the lore archives manually. ;-)
> > 
> > And yes, every time before I send a patch, I have an LLM check whether
> > it follows the instructions in the how-to.rst.
> 
> Please take a look at my review:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
> 
> The first comment is from Codex + ChatGPT.
> 
> And my skill complains the following warning:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/

I'm looking at right now ;-) because I'm at the "blame" line already.

> > 
> > > And I think we could try to add our subsystem to sashiko. What we need to do
> > > is to write some subsystem-related prompts.
> > I was thinking about this a few days ago. I'd actually planned to talk
> > to the Sashiko maintainer about it first, but I haven´t gotten around
> > to it yet. As far as I know, though, Sashiko can currently only be
> > enabled based on mailing lists; it can't filter or match patches
> > specifically for the Chinese translation subsystem.
> > 
> > Overall, though, I´m in favor of enabling Sashiko for us. Having an
> > extra pair of automated eyes certainly doesn't hurt. That said, some
> > settings may be worth discussing - for example, whether the Sashiko bot
> > should be allowed to send review comments directly to the original patch
> > thread.
> 
> Maybe we can do some tricks in the prompt. docs/zh_CN: is an obvious signal
> for us.

Yes, I'll take a look at it later.