There have been many discussions in the free-software community about the role of large language models (LLMs) in software development. For the most part, though, those conversations have focused on whether projects should be accepting code output by those models, and under what conditions. But there are other ways in which these systems might participate in the development process. Chris Mason recently started a discussion on the Kernel Summit discussion list about how these models can be used to review patches, rather than create them.
自由软件社区中已经就大型语言模型（LLM）在软件开发中的作用展开了许多讨论。然而，大多数讨论都集中在计划是否应该接受这些模型生成的代码，以及在什么条件下能够接受。但实际上，这些系统还可以凭借其他方式参与制作过程。Chris Mason 最近就在 Kernel Summit 邮件列表上发起了一场讨论，探讨如何使用这些模型来审查补丁生成补丁。就是，而不
Mason's focus was on how LLMs might reduce the load on kernel maintainers by catching errors before they hit the mailing lists, and by helping contributors increase the quality of their submissions. To that end, he has put together a set of prompts that will produce reviews in a format that maintainers are used to: "The reviews are meant to look like emails on lkml, and even when wildly wrong they definitely succeed there". He included a long list of sample reviews, some of which hit the mark and others of which did not.
Mason 关注的重点是，LLM 如何能在补丁提交到邮件列表之前发现错误，从而减轻内核维护者的负担，并帮助开发者提高提交质量。为此，他整理了一套提示词，可以生成符合维护者习惯格式的审查结果：“这些审查看起来就像 lkml 上的邮件，即使完全错得离谱，也能很好地融入其中。”他还附上了一长串示例审查，其中有些切中要害，有些则并不准确。
The prompts are interesting in their own right; they can be seen as constituting the sort of comprehensive patch-review documentation that nobody ever quite got around to writing for humans to use. Perhaps that reflects a higher level of confidence that the LLM will actually read all of this material. These prompts add up to thousands of lines of material, starting with core guidance like:
这些提示词本身就非常有趣；它们几乎构成了一份“人类从未真正写完”的全面