Re: [PATCH 0/4] Update maintainer-pgp-guide.rst Chinese translation
From: Dongliang Mu
Date: Fri Aug 21 2026 - 09:50:38 EST
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:That makes sense. I'll give it a try. Still, given that the kernel
On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 08:17:06PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:Actually these labor-tensive works should be done by LLM. This is one of the
[...]
Yes, I was being lazy to type the full pach/full file name, oops.(I definitely won't admit that the log file annoyed me a few timesMy experience is to not use 'git add .'. In Linux, hidden files are not
because I accidentally included it with 'git add .' and then had to 'git
commit --amend' right after) ;-)
listed by default.
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
right directions of LLM usage.
You can write a simple skill to help you complete these works.
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.
And LLM is really good at capturing some common problems in the patchset.
As Chen-Yu mentioned before, I´ve basically trained myself to findAh, this is interesting.Got it, thanks.LLM is really useful to capture some syntax and semantics issues. Therefore,Absolutely. I did have relatively little experience writing rst before.Btw I've been trying to know more about Sphinx and kernel-docs, hope myThat change can fix problem. The underlying problem is RST syntax. Maybe you
mistake won't happen again.
can have a look at this or query it in the LLM.
But that's definitely no excuse - I'll try to pick it up quickly.
before submitting patch, use LLM to scan problem in this issue.
I am writing a draft skill for reviewing patches of kernel ChineseNice! I've been trying "b4 review tui" these days and I also made some
documentation.
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.
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.
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/b45c6389-a048-4a94-8649-ab0c5a80fac2@xxxxxxxxxxx/
The first comment is from Codex + ChatGPT.
And my skill complains the following warning:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/7724c093-cb99-490d-b632-1381e16962ff@xxxxxxxxxxx/
Maybe we can do some tricks in the prompt. docs/zh_CN: is an obvious signal for us.
And I think we could try to add our subsystem to sashiko. What we need to doI was thinking about this a few days ago. I'd actually planned to talk
is to write some subsystem-related prompts.
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.
Thanks!