{"id":496876,"date":"2026-03-26T18:59:08","date_gmt":"2026-03-26T18:59:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/496876\/"},"modified":"2026-03-26T18:59:08","modified_gmt":"2026-03-26T18:59:08","slug":"linux-kernel-czar-says-ai-bug-reports-arent-slop-anymore-the-register","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/496876\/","title":{"rendered":"Linux kernel czar says AI bug reports aren&#8217;t slop anymore \u2022 The Register"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Interview I was at a press luncheon at KubeCon Europe this week when, to my surprise, who should sit down next to me but long-term Linux kernel maintainer Greg Kroah-Hartman. Greg, who lives in the Netherlands these days, was there to briefly comment on AI, Linux, and security. We spoke about how, over the last month, AI-driven activity around Linux security and code review has &#8220;really jumped&#8221; in a way no one in the open source world saw coming.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Months ago, we were getting what we called &#8216;AI slop,&#8217; AI-generated security reports that were obviously wrong or low quality,&#8221; he said. &#8220;It was kind of funny. It didn&#8217;t really worry us.&#8221; Of course, there are many Linux kernel maintainers, so for them, AI slop isn&#8217;t as burdensome as it is for, say, Daniel Stenberg, founder and lead developer of cURL, where AI slop reports caused the cURL team to <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.theregister.com\/2026\/01\/21\/curl_ends_bug_bounty\/\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">stop paying bug bounties<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/shuttertstock_linus_torvalds.jpg\" width=\"174\" height=\"115\" alt=\"Linus Torvalds\"\/><br \/>\nLinus Torvalds and friends tell The Reg how Linux solo act became a global jam session<br \/>\n<a href=\"https:\/\/www.theregister.com\/2026\/02\/18\/linus_torvalds_and_friends\/\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\">READ MORE<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Things have changed, Kroah-Hartman said. &#8220;Something happened a month ago, and the world switched. Now we have real reports.&#8221; It&#8217;s not just Linux, he continued. &#8220;All open source projects have real reports that are made with AI, but they&#8217;re good, and they&#8217;re real.&#8221; Security teams across major open source projects talk informally and frequently, he noted, and everyone is seeing the same shift. &#8220;All open source security teams are hitting this right now.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>No one is quite sure what&#8217;s behind it. Asked what changed, Kroah-Hartman was blunt: &#8220;We don&#8217;t know. Nobody seems to know why. Either a lot more tools got a lot better, or people started going, &#8216;Hey, let&#8217;s start looking at this.&#8217; It seems like lots of different groups, different companies.&#8221; What is clear is the scale. &#8220;For the kernel, we can handle it,&#8221; he said.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We&#8217;re a much larger team, very distributed, and our increase is real \u2013 and it&#8217;s not slowing down. These are tiny things, they&#8217;re not major things, but we need help on this for all the open source projects.&#8221; Smaller projects, he implied, have far less capacity to absorb a sudden flood of plausible AI-generated bug reports and security findings \u2013 at least now they&#8217;re real bugs and not garbage ones.<\/p>\n<p>Behind the scenes, security teams are comparing notes. &#8220;We get together informally and talk a lot, because we all have the same problems,&#8221; he said. &#8220;There must have been some inflection point somewhere with the tools. Did the local tools get better? Did people figure out something? I honestly don&#8217;t know.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>For now, AI is showing up more as a reviewer and assistant than as a full author of Linux kernel code, but that line is starting to blur. Kroah-Hartman has already done his own experiments with AI-generated patches.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;I did a really stupid prompt,&#8221; he recounted. &#8220;I said, &#8216;Give me this,&#8217; and it spit out 60: &#8216;Here&#8217;s 60 problems I found, and here&#8217;s the fixes for them.&#8217; About one-third were wrong, but they still pointed out a relatively real problem, and two-thirds of the patches were right.&#8221; Mind you, those working patches still needed human cleanup, better changelogs, and integration work, but they were far from useless. &#8220;The tools are good,&#8221; he said. &#8220;We can&#8217;t ignore this stuff. It&#8217;s coming up, and it&#8217;s getting better.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Developers are starting to acknowledge AI&#8217;s role in actual submissions. &#8220;We&#8217;re seeing some patches being generated,&#8221; Kroah-Hartman said. &#8220;You have a little co-develop tag for that now. We&#8217;re seeing some things for some new features, but we&#8217;re seeing AI mostly being used in the review.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Asked whether he could imagine a near-future where most of the work on simple changes comes from AI, he said that for &#8220;simple little error conditions, properly detecting error conditions,&#8221; AI could already generate dozens of usable patches today.<\/p>\n<p>The sudden increase in AI-generated reports and AI-assisted work has also spurred a parallel push to build AI into the kernel&#8217;s own review infrastructure. A key piece of that is Sashiko, a tool originally developed at Google and <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.theregister.com\/2026\/03\/20\/sashiko_code_review_linux\/\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">now donated to the Linux Foundation<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We need to be able to have an easy way to review some of these patches that come in ways that cut down on our load.&#8221; The tool is &#8220;out there, running on almost all kernel patches,&#8221; he said. &#8220;You can see it publicly. We&#8217;re integrating it into our review tools. It&#8217;s available for anybody to use.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>That work builds on earlier efforts inside specific subsystems. &#8220;The networking and the BPF people have been doing LLM-generated reviews for a while,&#8221; said Kroah-Hartman. &#8220;The Direct Rendering Manager (DRM) people and now Google&#8217;s tool are pulling all those into one common interface,&#8221; he explained. &#8220;Different subsystems are adding better skills or prompts \u2013 for storage, here are the things you need to look for; for graphics, here are the things you need to look for. People are contributing in a public place for that, which is how it should be. This is very good.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Kroah-Hartman credited longtime kernel developer Chris Mason, now at Meta, with pioneering AI-based review workflows. Mason has been running AI review for eBPF and networking for some time. The systemd project is also using the same class of tools for its all-C codebase.<\/p>\n<p>AI reviewers, he stressed, are additive rather than authoritative. &#8220;On the review side, it&#8217;s generating some good reviews. It doesn&#8217;t get you everything. Some things are still wrong. But it does point out a lot of the obvious things,&#8221; he said.<\/p>\n<p>One of the biggest immediate wins is turnaround time. When an AI reviewer flags obvious problems, submitters get feedback long before a human maintainer would realistically read the patch. &#8220;If I see it respond to something, it gives feedback to the submitter faster than the maintainer had a chance to, which is nice,&#8221; Kroah-Hartman said. &#8220;We have a number of bots that run on patches as it is. If I see those fail, I just know I don&#8217;t even need to look at that as a maintainer. And it gives the developer, &#8216;Oh, I can go do another version tomorrow,&#8217; which helps increase the feedback a little better.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Still, as AI-generated reports and patches grow, so does the review burden. &#8220;It&#8217;s more reviews; it&#8217;s more stuff we have to review for the kernel,&#8221; he said. That&#8217;s why efforts with the OpenSSF and its Alpha-Omega program matter. &#8220;We&#8217;re working to try and create tools to help make it easier for maintainers to handle this incoming feed and deal with it.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>A recurring theme for Kroah-Hartman is equity of access. Until recently, only well-resourced subsystems could afford to run heavy AI tooling at scale. Turning Google&#8217;s review system into a Linux Foundation project is meant to change that.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;That&#8217;s this one tool that we have for the review,&#8221; he said. &#8220;It&#8217;s one tool as an example of how now, as an LF project, we&#8217;re giving access to everybody. Before, it was just the subsystems that had the resources to run it on the back end. Right now, we&#8217;re giving it to everyone.&#8221; Work is already underway to make it usable beyond the kernel&#8217;s own infrastructure.<\/p>\n<p>That matters because, as Kroah-Hartman keeps emphasizing, the AI wave is not just a kernel problem. &#8220;All open source projects have real reports that are made with AI,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Our increase is real, and it&#8217;s not slowing down. These aren&#8217;t major things, but we need help on this for all the open source projects.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>For Linux, the relationship with AI is already evolving past theory and into practice. It&#8217;s a mixed blessing. AI is simultaneously a new source of real vulnerabilities that strains human reviewers who must deal with them, while also helping to manage that strain.<\/p>\n<p>The trick for Kroah-Hartman and his peers will be to keep AI as a force multiplier, without drowning the open source maintainers. \u00ae<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Interview I was at a press luncheon at KubeCon Europe this week when, to my surprise, who should&hellip;\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":496877,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[554,733,4308,86,56,54,55],"class_list":{"0":"post-496876","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-artificial-intelligence","8":"tag-ai","9":"tag-artificial-intelligence","10":"tag-artificialintelligence","11":"tag-technology","12":"tag-uk","13":"tag-united-kingdom","14":"tag-unitedkingdom"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/496876","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=496876"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/496876\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/496877"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=496876"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=496876"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=496876"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}