On 2026-07-01 14:35 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Wed, 2026-07-01 at 17:54 +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > I remain very confused by our coding assistant contribution guidelines. > > I'm going to be a bit polemic now but this seriously in good faith. > > > > Why precisely do we require all this detailed information about what > > specific coding assistant was used? > > > > I find it very irritating that our git history has effectively started > > to function a bit like a free advertising platform for a bunch of AI > > companies and their proprietary agents and models. > > > > And it reamins unclear to me what exactly we do get out of this detailed > > information: Do we want to run statistical analysis on what agent and > > model is used the most and publish that on LWN at some point? > > > > I acknowledge that my stance is even more radical: imho we would just > > stop it with any disclosure requirements completely. It's useless imho. > > We already see that other than core contributors most people don't care > > and will just not disclose their usage of AI. I think this is entirely > > pointless and worse it brings in undefined legal status as well. It's > > not like recent events of pulling certain models from the face of the > > earth have made this any less concerning. > > > > But fine, if we want to do this can we please just dumb it down to > > > > Assisted-by: LLM > > > > or > > > > Assisted-by: Coding Assistant > > > > or something else. That still gives the "careful review" signal to > > reviewers that want to pay special attention to LLM generated work while > > avoiding this slew of metadata. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner (Amutable) <[email protected]> > > --- > > Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst | 8 ++------ > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst > > b/Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst > > index 899f4459c52d..fe34f3e7e828 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst > > +++ b/Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst > > @@ -43,12 +43,8 @@ When AI tools contribute to kernel development, proper > > attribution > > helps track the evolving role of AI in the development process. > > Contributions should include an Assisted-by tag in the following format:: > > > > - Assisted-by: AGENT_NAME:MODEL_VERSION [TOOL1] [TOOL2] > > + Assisted-by: LLM [TOOL1] [TOOL2] > > > > -Where: > > - > > -* ``AGENT_NAME`` is the name of the AI tool or framework > > -* ``MODEL_VERSION`` is the specific model version used > > * ``[TOOL1] [TOOL2]`` are optional specialized analysis tools used > > (e.g., coccinelle, sparse, smatch, clang-tidy) > > > > @@ -56,4 +52,4 @@ Basic development tools (git, gcc, make, editors) should > > not be listed. > > > > Example:: > > > > - Assisted-by: Claude:claude-3-opus coccinelle sparse > > + Assisted-by: LLM coccinelle sparse > > > > --- > > base-commit: dc59e4fea9d83f03bad6bddf3fa2e52491777482 > > change-id: 20260701-work-coding-assistants-650ae1202ee0 > > > In general, collecting data for nebulous purposes usually turns out to > be a bad idea. If we're not 100% clear on why we want this data, then > we're probably better off not collecting it at all.
Agreed. > With that in mind: if we're going to water down the tag, then I say > just remove the requirement altogether. If we later decide that we want > to start collecting more detailed info for some (clear) purpose then we > can revisit the idea. Agreed.
