Re: [PATCH v2] docs/process: document AI-assisted patch tags

[Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, May 21, 2026 at 05:46:18PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 19.05.2026 16:20, Cody Zuschlag wrote:
> > --- a/docs/process/sending-patches.pandoc
> > +++ b/docs/process/sending-patches.pandoc
> > @@ -195,6 +195,25 @@ E.g.:
> >  
> >      Requested-by: Jane Doe <jane.doe@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >  
> > +### Assisted-by:
> > +
> > +This optional tag can be used when AI-assisted tooling contributed to the
> > +preparation of a patch.
> 
> Noticed only while reading your other email, plus checking the Linux
> wording: s/can/should/ at the very least? (Personally I'd make it a
> requirement.)
> 
> > It is in the format:
> > +
> > +    Assisted-by: <tool-name>[:<model-version>] [tool...]
> > +
> > +E.g.:
> > +
> > +    Assisted-by: Claude:claude-3-opus coccinelle sparse
> > +    Assisted-by: ChatGPT:gpt-5.5
> > +
> > +Basic development tools, such as git, compilers, make, and editors, should
> > +not be listed.
> > +
> > +The person submitting the patch remains responsible for reviewing any
> > +AI-generated content and ensuring the contribution is correct, appropriate,
> > +and compliant with Xen's contribution and licensing requirements.
> > +
> >  ### Signed-off-by:
> >  
> >  This mandatory tag specifies the author(s) of a patch (for each author a
> > @@ -209,6 +228,9 @@ E.g.:
> >  The author must be a natural person (not a team or just a company) and the
> >  `Signed-off-by:` tag must include the real name of the author (no 
> > pseudonym).
> >  
> > +AI tools must not add `Signed-off-by:` tags, as only natural
> > +persons can certify the `Developer's Certificate of Origin`.
> 
> Linux emphasizes "MUST NOT". I think that's advisable for us as well. I
> also wonder whether some of their other wording might be worth taking
> verbatim, rather than making our own, slightly different variant.
> 
> Nit: Wrap differently to make better use of line length?

With the proposed changes:

Acked-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks, Roger.