On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 09:42:27AM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > +cc Linus > > On Sun, Jul 27, 2025 at 03:57:58PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > > This patch series adds unified configuration and documentation for coding > > agents working with the Linux kernel codebase. As coding agents > > become increasingly common in software development, it's important to > > establish clear guidelines for their use in kernel development. > > Hi Sasha, > > I feel like we need to take a step back here and consider some of the > non-technical consqeuences of this change. > > Firstly, there is no doubt whatsoever that, were this series to land, there > would be significant press which would amount to (whether you like it or > not) 'Linux kernel welcomes AI patches'. > > I don't feel that a change of this magnitude which is likely to have this > kind of impact should be RFC'd quietly and then, after a weekend, submitted > ready to merge. > > This change, whether you like it or not - amounts to (or at the very least, > certainly will be perceived to be) kernel policy. And, AFAIK, we don't have > an AI kernel policy doc yet. > > So to me: > > - We should establish an official kernel AI policy document. Steven Rostedt is working on this right now, hopefully he has something "soon". > - This should be discussed at the maintainers summit before proceeding. Sounds reasonable as well. But I think that Kees and my earlier points of "the documentation should be all that an agent needs" might aleviate many of these concerns, if our documentation can be tweaked in a way to make it easier for everyone, humans and bots, to understand. That should cut down on the "size" of this patch series a lot overall. > In addition, it's concerning that we're explicitly adding configs for > specific, commercial, products. This might be seen as an endorsement > whether intended or not. Don't we already have that for a few things already, like .editorconfig? thanks, greg k-h
