On 20/09/2026 15:22, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 20/09/2026 12:37, Omer PALA wrote:
Hi Greg,
I thought someone (not you) can allow this.
So you received feedback from Greg, but tried on different part, hoping this time it will get accepted?
This looks similar to you previous approaches, e.g. for DT bindings, where you received comments and repeated the same thing immediately. Three or four time.
I want to contribute kernel but i dont know what should i do.
I suggest spend some time to actually read the archives when people point it.
I wrote 3 devicetree schemas, 2 performance fixes, 2 mutex/spinlock fixes and 1 syntax fix.
All of my work got NAK.
One was pure AI slop, so what did you expect exactly? In all channels, fediverse, some technological news, open source projects complain about sent slop, they reject it and treat it as one of biggest time wasting thing contributor could do. It is not like we hide it, right? Actually opposite, everywhere we scream - don't send vibe coded stuff. And for learning or beginning this is even unacceptable waste of your time, because you will learn nothing. I was raising it for GSoC for example more than once and it is documented in their rules.
Can you explain me what should i do?
One idea would be to read more before you actually contribute.
... and if you even asked your AI like I did now: "how linux kernel developers look at LLM contributions from beginners?" I got:
"Linux kernel developers view unverified AI-generated code from beginners with heavy skepticism and frustration due to a massive influx of low-quality submissions that overwhelm maintainers."
"Rejection of AI "slop": "
"Staging area bans: Certain high-traffic areas prone to beginner contributions, such as the kernel's staging drivers (drivers/staging/), have implemented strict policies forbidding LLM-generated patches ...."
Yet you did exactly what should not be done - were using LLM.
Best regards, Krzysztof