Linux's Staging Area To Now Reject LLM-Generated Patches, Except For Real Security Fixes
Note, LLMs are very good at finding suspect "security issues" in kernel code these days. But even with the best of the current and next generation tools, at least 1/3 of the results they generate are flat out wrong or harmful. So, if you think your LLM-found/fixed issue in a drivers/staging/ file is really valid, it's fine to submit it BUT you must have first tested it on the actual hardware for the driver, and described how you have done so, in order for us to be willing to take the change.
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-Staging-Reject-LLMsOpen linkView original on piefed.social
10 replies
Record time speedrun from "I'm putting my foot down in favor of AI" to "at least 1/3 of patches are flat out wrong or harmful", eh?
It’s easy to not have a problem with AI merge requests when you have a whole team of people filtering out the garbage before it gets to you.
It was “I’m putting my foot down in favor of AI” for finding security flaws and triaging issues, not writing code. Shit's useful for things that can be easily verified, like security flaws, less so (OK, crap) for writing maintainable code in a massive codebase with highly complex interactions.
AI is a tool, its just that most people seem to not understand that you don't want to use a screw driver as a hammer
And before anyone goes crazy about me defending AI, I'm not. At least not the AI we see today with the world destroying data centers and so on. Every tool has its uses, so does AI, its just that the real use cases are highly limited
I think it was more a declaration of neutrality
Just like in a lot of other topics, neutrality doesn't exist here. If you're not actively opposing evil, you're supporting it. As a narrow example, be "neutral" to slop, drown in it immediately.
Exactly this. Linus doesn't give a shit if the garbage came from meat or a clanker, he treats all garbage equally.
If it's obviously AI, you may get a silent rejection instead of a public beating.
If it's not garbage, you may get a change request email!
Complete misunderstanding of what he actually said, you only read the headlines.
Yeah, all other commenters here just didn't read the article it seems.
Nice, I can get behind that policy. LLMs can be useful but only if you assume the output is wrong until proven correct. Using it to find potential threads to pull at makes sense to me but not blindly trusting everything it points out