On Sun, 17 May 2026 12:12:00 +0200 Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, May 17, 2026 at 12:05:56PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > On Sat, 16 May 2026 14:59:44 -0700 > > Roman Gushchin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On May 16, 2026, at 2:33 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I find it opposite: clogging commits with useless information, because > > > > some arbitrary and completely closed-source tool did analysis means > > > > nothing to me one year later when I look at the commit in the Git > > > > history. > > > > > > This is simple not true: Sashiko is fully open-source, under Apache 2.0 > > > license > > > and the code belongs to LF. > > > > > Yes, the instance behind sashiko.dev is using > > > Gemini 3.1 Pro LLM, which is not open-source, but it’s not a fundamental > > > limitation - > > > Sashiko is supporting various LLMs, including open models - it’s just a > > > practical > > > choice: to my knowledge the quality of open models is not on par with > > > frontier closed > > > models > > > > I would very much prefer using an open source LLM, even if not in pair > > with latest paid models. > > > > > and it would require a non-trivial amount of hardware and infrastructure > > > to run > > > an open model at the required scale. > > > > IMHO the best would be to have them running on some infra that would accept > > open source models (*). If there aren't enough resources to have our own > > infra, there are offers out there which allows running open source models > > like https://ollama.com/pricing (I never used myself). > > > > (*) For instance, Qwen3.6 is brand new and licensed under apache-2.0. > > Not bad on my tests running it locally. > > You can run the tool locally, with whatever model you want, if you want > to. > > But for now, let's just take the free credits that Google is willing to > throw at this thing and let it give us reviews IF the maintainer of the > subsystem feels it is something they want to do. No one is forcing > maintainers to do this. If Google and/or others are willing to give free credits on their cloud, they could instead or in addition give free credits to run ollama there, allowing us to use different models. From my side, while I won't personally object getting reviews from Sashiko/Gemini, this is something I can't reproduce locally. I would very much want something where I can select my LLM preferred model and run on my ollama docker container on my own GPU, in a way that I could run it locally before even sending a patch series. > The netdev, bpf, and drm developers have been doing much the same for a > while now, with who-knows-what model behind the thing. The model > doesn't matter, we aren't advertising for them, we just want the results > that they can provide us. It is not about the model itself. It is about being able to easily install a sashiko locally on a container and easily make it use my ollma server with the model(s) of my choice. Right now, at least at from its README.md, it sounds that only closed source services are supported. Thanks, Mauro
