Re: [PATCH] [v3] Documentation: Provide guidelines for tool-generated content

[James Bottomley]

On Thu, 2026-01-08 at 11:56 +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2026 at 04:20:04PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > On 1/7/26 13:15, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > > Thinking LLMs are 'just another tool' is to say effectively that
> > > the kernel
> > > is immune from this. Which seems to me a silly position.
> > 
> > I had a good chat with Lorenzo on IRC. I had it in my head that he
> > wanted a really different document than the one I posted. After
> > talking,
> > it sounds like he had some much more modest changes in mind. I
> > caught
> > him at the end of his day, but I think he's planning to send out a
> > small
> > diff on top of what I posted so I can get a better idea of what he
> > wants
> > to see tweaked.
> 
> I enclose the suggested incremental change below.
> 
> Cheers, Lorenzo
> 
> ----8<----
> From ccefc4da6b929914c754c2f898b0eb17d7fb3ebd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> 2001
> From: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 11:55:10 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH] suggestion
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/process/generated-content.rst | 8 ++++++++
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/generated-content.rst
> b/Documentation/process/generated-content.rst
> index 917d6e93c66d..1423ed9d971d 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/generated-content.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/generated-content.rst
> @@ -95,3 +95,11 @@ choose how they handle the contribution. For
> example, they might:
>   - Ask the submitter to explain in more detail about the
> contribution
>     so that the maintainer can feel comfortable that the submitter
> fully
>     understands how the code works.
> +
> +If tools permit you to generate series entirely automatically,
> expect
> +additional scrutiny.
> +
> +As with the output of any tooling,


>  maintainers will not tolerate 'slop' -

Just delete this phrase (partly because it's very tied to a non-
standard and very recent use of the word slop, but mostly because it
doesn't add anything actionable to the reader).

> +you are expected to understand and to be able to defend everything
> you 
> +submit. If you are unable to do so, maintainers may choose to reject
> your
> +series outright.

And I thing the addition would apply to any tool used to generate a
patch set whether AI or not.

Regards,

James