diff options
| author | Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> | 2026-07-24 11:24:05 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> | 2026-07-27 18:03:26 -0700 |
| commit | c82ff94592fb68f529afe63ca7f5ddb7dae4ba83 (patch) | |
| tree | ab6895829b3dcf8a4005e0d76fae34e6adc38fe4 | |
| parent | 7d394ab234f744404f340638b02e9883c2d8be77 (diff) | |
| download | linux-next-c82ff94592fb68f529afe63ca7f5ddb7dae4ba83.tar.gz linux-next-c82ff94592fb68f529afe63ca7f5ddb7dae4ba83.zip | |
docs: netdev: clarify expected interactions with LLMs
The official documentation has not captured yet the current impact of
AI-generated reviews on the patch process.
Explicitly state the status quo and expectations.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Nicolai Buchwitz <nb@tipi-net.de>
Reviewed-by: Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) <matttbe@kernel.org>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/83360de7addb13a3b5f4d5e722148f248fdb2ae0.1784884817.git.pabeni@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst | 16 |
1 files changed, 16 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst index e58f541c29e0..1739d9f856c3 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst @@ -203,6 +203,22 @@ For RFC postings specifically, if nobody responded in a week - reviewers either missed the posting or have no strong opinions. If the code is ready, repost as a PATCH. +There are 2 services actively providing LLM-generated review on posted patches: + +- https://sashiko.dev/ +- https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/sashiko/ + +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. + +Authors are strongly encouraged to run LLM reviews on the posted patches in +advance of the actual post. Large series triggering a significant amount of +AI-generated feedback will likely get little attention from maintainers and +reviewers. + Emails saying just "ping" or "bump" are considered rude. If you can't figure out the status of the patch from patchwork or where the discussion has landed - describe your best guess and ask if it's correct. For example:: |