Comment by rvz

This is a great article in discussing the pros / cons in adopting LLM-generated patches in critical projects such as the kernel. Even some of the comments give their nuanced observations on this, for exammple the top comment gives an accurate assessment of the strengths and limitations of LLMs perfectly:

> LLMs are particularly effective for language-related tasks - obviously. For example, they can proof-read text, generate high-quality commit messages, or at least provide solid drafts.

> LLMs are not so strong for programming, especially when it comes to creating something totally new. They usually need very limited and specific context to work well.

The big takeaway is regardless of whoever generated the code: "...it is the human behind the patch who will ultimately be responsible for its contents." which implies they need* to understand what the code does with no regressions introduced.