Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] docs: netdev: clarify expected interactions with LLMs

Hi Paolo,

Excuse me for the late reply, just some thoughts.
On Fri, Jul 24, 2026 at 03:39:15PM +0200, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Hi Paolo, Jakub,
> 
> On 24/07/2026 13:56, Jakub Raczynski wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 24, 2026 at 11:24:05AM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> >> +both use the Sashiko infrastructure on top of different models. Reviews are
> >> +available after 24h. Patch authors are expected to proactively look into the
> >> +AI-generated reviews and handle such feedback as any other kind of review:
> >> +either debate it or address it. In both cases a reply on the mailing list is
> >> +expected.
> >> +
> > 
> > Would it be reasonable to implement automatic response from Sashiko to
> > mailing list? Some mailing lists (eg. dri-devel as far as I have seen) post
> > all replies from Sashiko to thread, which is imo not bad,
> > although it could be filtered by High/Critical severity.
> > 
> > What do you think about potential for similar solution on netdev,
> > since AI review has become 'basic' check in patchwork?
> I was thinking that too: it would be easier to reply to the comments,
> and help the authors to remember about them. That will not help to
> decrease the traffic on the netdev ML, but it is also possible to
> configure Sashiko to email only the authors:
> 
>   https://github.com/sashiko-dev/sashiko/blob/main/docs/configuration.md#email_policytoml

+1 for reply_to_author first. Copying & pasting and reformatting the AI review
comments takes time. Maybe some maintainers also want to receive the AI review
report. But I feel the netdev list is already very busy, and replying to the
mailing list would flood it with more messages.

I think the ideal way is for the result to be subscribed to. With this, users
who are interested in the review results can receive the replies separately.

Thanks
Hangbin