Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 08:44:46PM +0100, [email protected] wrote: >Hi all, > >This came up at kernel maintainers summit, so I've been trying to see >what I can piece together, and have a small demonstration that may be >useful to some people. > >I didn't want to pollute the mailing list with AI patch reviews, so I >decided to set up a public-inbox that the reviews are pushed into. >This isn't currently automated, I'm just asking claude to pull the >last 2-3 days of patches and review what is new every so often. > >The workflow use lei to pull mails to local PC, use review-prompts + >my own prompt to try and review a patch series, both as a complete >work, and per-patch reviews, then create the reply emails and put them >into a public inbox git tree for publishing. > >I've no idea if it's using review-prompts properly or at all, this is >all very vibe coded so far. > >https://lore.gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm-ai-reviews/ > >This is a public inbox, you can also git clone > >https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/ai-reviews-public-inbox > >I'm currently just using my Red Hat provided claude with opus 4.6, >until I get told I've burned enough money. > >The list below are the patches with reviews, if someone wants to look >and give feedback on whether the reviews for their series are useful, >find any bugs or regressions, that would be cool.
Overall for my patchset I think the feedback looks pretty much accurate. What I like is that is even considered the email disscussion about one of the patches. But since you ran the AI one-shot, does it make sense? The disscussion may evolve and the verdict with arguments may be stall (not our case). Eventually when AI-re-run after every reply might be needed, in that case, better to have the output publised on a continuously updated web somewhere perhaps, not over emails? [...]
