From nobody Fri Jul 24 22:17:48 2026 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58B523ADB89; Wed, 22 Jul 2026 20:34:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784752483; cv=none; b=nCFwRtN7jcTcmsO6NL92dyugzU39vxkko14EbpQfeyftQlSog/dfYmHP3iebD1UjUMhTo+vUVyuxrVY3yZDLdbIEA2/DGAEYbRhm8rmIUhHWCftGxKH96C/1YjGX6+tbLth47QOO+ojQNHTorXQym+1HHBkaFkwLuhFdmmobfTA= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784752483; c=relaxed/simple; bh=3EM35DrazWHOGnL1WA0md6Y0yHSpTPtIDYTxY4sAnsI=; h=From:To:Subject:CC:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=WibEBbhdafsi9ZfNzojxZpXdbJLPvi9wZYH+3tPKzjEnAGInybGXnvxhtFHcopWbE3CKH95+t+iMcxvu2dz/GmLbGxIE+9+/xDzZyTLG5xdEGkAV5mF3ljQTuMhsOzPg1tYSwARgKaGv2cSmtqrhsYHobNvjIRccNo7T1A9aXF4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=Hp3Bouc4; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="Hp3Bouc4" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 52B79408B4 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1784752481; bh=pBK92qQP7ibC2nnHbqd5AtRi4H8CmvdEWSxkweTawTg=; h=From:To:Subject:CC:Date:From; b=Hp3Bouc4kQAYEpD9+gNMvQXxvNStUj3nlbEtekNHIImevtQtx4I8JD4gOfgRjfkC9 MxI60pqRgxE0cCj6cCkLECn3E9SQvmNn9PPVXLUmzMyOTDP9g2W92KX1O8N9+C7fcY toPHGWiRmGM4RSZBopHOxaEMaxuJYbL1daZl1D27eiaXKjMKaVG6mgMLgXKoHsuvdR E9miO/NAoll9FRH9vRy4wbSPnhN8ppmNUsKiLgoHFWhP0uWNbxiRp3iFV/+fmkvW5D YnxkBQTnm8fGQZprGzDawOiwwy/njD8vodJP1Rn1mHGriYA+oqWQIh4TGjjD5Mm4PF PhveNDAFGYS+w== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:4600:27b::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 52B79408B4; Wed, 22 Jul 2026 20:34:41 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christian Brauner Subject: [PATCH] coding-assistants: simplify attribution CC: Lorenzo Stoakes , Jeff Layton , Jori Koolstra , Sasha Levin , tech-board@groups.linuxfoundation.org, Jakub Kicinski , workflows@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 14:34:40 -0600 Message-ID: <87qzkuahlr.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" As suggested by Christian, I have applied his patch to a branch and simplified the changelog, see below. I'm nervous about applying it still because I don't think it's my role to set this sort of policy; I really want to feel that there is a consensus behind it. So there's some additional CCs here because I would like to hear from some folks: - This policy document originally came out of the TAB; is the TAB (on CC) OK with this change? - At least one maintainer (on CC) have said that they currently strip Assisted-by tags out of patches before applying them, a practice that would seem to undermine the whole policy. Would this change be sufficient to end that practice? Thanks, jon From c31aa376a355e3b84b9e87ae1dbe19b394d4c82c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Christian Brauner Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2026 17:54:48 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] coding-assistants: simplify attribution The requirement to identify specific models used in the Assisted-by tag provides free advertising to proprietary software companies while adding little or no useful information. Change the requirement to simply: Assisted-by: LLM to capture the fact that an LLM was used without tracking which one. Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner (Amutable) Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton Reviewed-by: Jori Koolstra Message-ID: <20260701-work-coding-assistants-v1-1-a20a94d1d606@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand (arm) Reviewed-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab --- Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst | 8 ++------ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst b/Documentation/pr= ocess/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 a= ttribution helps track the evolving role of AI in the development process. Contributions should include an Assisted-by tag in the following format:: =20 - Assisted-by: AGENT_NAME:MODEL_VERSION [TOOL1] [TOOL2] + Assisted-by: LLM [TOOL1] [TOOL2] =20 -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) =20 @@ -56,4 +52,4 @@ Basic development tools (git, gcc, make, editors) should = not be listed. =20 Example:: =20 - Assisted-by: Claude:claude-3-opus coccinelle sparse + Assisted-by: LLM coccinelle sparse --=20 2.55.0