On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 11:17:32AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Sun, 16 Nov 2025 07:25:46 -0800 > Kees Cook <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 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. > > Exactly. My fear was that by adding any new rules (like a tag) will > steer this conversation into a never ending bikeshed arguments, which > was exactly what we wanted to avoid. > > Let's have the "tag" conversation at Maintainers Summit and just keep > this document as something to describe what we do today.
What's the status of this patch? I don't see it in linux-next, is it supposed to go through some specific tree? thanks, greg k-h
