On Mon, Aug 03, 2026 at 11:28:46AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Sun, Aug 2, 2026, at 17:51, Junrui Luo via B4 Relay wrote: > > > > Patches 1-5 are tagged for stable. 6/6 is deliberately not: it changes the > > atomicity of multi-element mailbox transfers rather than just adding a > > check, so it seems better to let it soak in mainline first. > > > > Build-tested only. I have no Cell or PS3 hardware, so none of this has > > been exercised at runtime. > > These are all reasonable fixes as far as I can tell, but I'm missing > information about why you care about spufs. If you used some atomated > tooling, please add some reference to what you used. > > Arnd
Hi Arnd, We're working on a paper on LLM-assisted vulnerability research. spufs was just picked at random as one of the modules to look at. The tooling is an agent we developed ourselves. Should we add an Assisted-by tag in v2? Thanks, Junrui Luo
