On Fri, Nov 14 2025 at 10:35, Dave Hansen wrote:
> +In Scope
> +========
> +
> +These guidelines apply when a meaningful amount of content in a kernel
> +contribution was not written by a person in the Signed-off-by chain,
> +but was instead created by a tool.
> +
> +Detection of a problem and testing the fix for it is also part of the
> +development process; if a tool was used to find a problem addressed by
> +a change, that should be noted in the changelog. This not only gives
> +credit where it is due, it also helps fellow developers find out about
> +these tools.
> +
> +Some examples:
> + - Any tool-suggested fix such as ``checkpatch.pl --fix``
> + - Coccinelle scripts
> + - A chatbot generated a new function in your patch to sort list entries.
> + - A .c file in the patch was originally generated by a coding
> + assistant but cleaned up by hand.
> + - The changelog was generated by handing the patch to a generative AI
> + tool and asking it to write the changelog.
> + - The changelog was translated from another language.
> +
> +If in doubt, choose transparency and assume these guidelines apply to
> +your contribution.
Can we pretty please define a tag and format for this?
I'm not really interested in the creative ways which will otherwise make
change logs even more incomprehensible.
Thanks
tglx
