Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add agent coding assistant configuration to Linux kernel

[Lorenzo Stoakes]

On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 12:18:29PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2025 16:34:28 +0100
> Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > Which looked like someone else (now Cc'd on this thread) took it public,
> > > and I wanted to see where that ended. I didn't want to start another
> > > discussion when there's already two in progress.
> >
> > OK, but having a document like this is not in my view optional - we must
> > have a clear, stated policy and one which ideally makes plain that it's
> > opt-in and maintainers may choose not to take these patches.
>
> That sounds pretty much exactly as what I was stating in our meeting. That
> is, it is OK to submit a patch written with AI but you must disclose it. It
> is also the right of the Maintainer to refuse to take any patch that was
> written in AI. They may feel that they want someone who fully understands
> what that patch does, and AI can cloud the knowledge of that patch from the
> author.

*Ahem*

You cropped:

I'm not at all a fan of having a small entry hidden away in the submitting
patches doc, this is a really major issue that needs special consideration
and whose scope may change over time, so a dedicated document seems more
appropriate.

>
> I guess a statement in submitting-patches.rst would suffice, or should it
> be a separate standalone document?

I think the bit you cropped answers my view on your question :)