On November 16, 2025 4:38:35 AM PST, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Sunday, November 16, 2025 12:30:27 AM CET Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 15 2025 at 14:07, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> > On Sat, 15 Nov 2025 14:05:56 -0500
>> > Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> As Dave responded to Luis, although that is a good idea, it's out of
>> >> scope for this document (for now).
>> >
>> > I should have said it's out of scope for this patch, not document. The
>> > point is that what tag to use for this is a separate discussion.
>>
>> Which should be held in the context of this patch to make it complete.
>
>I agree, it would be good to get it all done in one go.
A tag isn't going to capture what we need today. Because the LLM usage is so
variable, it'll be, at best, misleading or, at worst, totally inaccurate. I've
provided several examples of this where the range of LLM involvement is very
low to very high. The prior discussions have shown that we haven't yet found a
sensible way for a tag to capture that.
But the common thing everyone appears to agree on is the "show your work"
concept that this patch is trying to capture. I think it's likely we'll grow a
tag eventually, but it isn't something we understand the context for yet. As a
first step, this document is designed to show the foundational goals for what
we want documented.
Over some time of applying this, we'll start to see common patterns and
repeated descriptions in commit logs. At that point, I think a tag will be
warranted. But right now, we don't generally agree about what aspects we want a
tag to cover.
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
