# torvalds-llm-outil-kernel-2026-07-14

## Veille

Message from **Linus Torvalds** on the **linux-media** mailing list (thread "Linking Patchwork with Sashiko?", about an LLM tool for maintainer assistance), in which the creator and **top-level maintainer** of the Linux kernel **officially settles the project's position on AI**. Responding to Roman Gushchin, who pointed out that an adverse message expressed "a very anti-LLM in general" stance, Torvalds agrees ("Yes") and then **flatly denies that this is the kernel's position** ("And no, that's not the position of the Linux kernel"). He **puts his foot down** as the supreme maintainer: **"Linux is not one of those anti-AI projects"**; those who take issue with that can **"do the open source thing: fork it"** — "or just walk away". **Central thesis**: **"AI is a tool, like the other tools we use, and clearly a useful tool"**; that may not have been "so 'clearly' true a year ago, but it's not in question today". He distinguishes questions **still open** ("what the AI economy will actually look like in the end") from the question that is **settled** ("is it useful?") — "anybody who doubts that clearly hasn't actually tried it". He **concedes** that the tool can be **"painful"** — maintainer burden, and the fact that it "keeps finding embarrassing bugs" — but refuses the ostrich posture ("put your head in the sand going 'La La La, I can't hear you'"). **The right response**: make sure **LLM tools _help_ maintainers** rather than causing them pain. **Non-coercion, deliberately**: "nobody is forced to use it, but **I will very loudly ignore those who try to prevent others from using it**". On imperfection: "AI isn't perfect, but hell, anybody who points at its problems had better also point at the mirror" — "**natural intelligence isn't always all that great either**". **Governance framework**: the kernel project "has always been and will remain about **technology**"; the social angle of open source is a "side benefit, not the _point_"; **"this is *NOT* some kind of 'social warrior' project, never has been, never will be"**; "we do open source because it results in **better technology**, not for religious reasons". Program-conclusion: **"we decide based on technical merit first. Not on fear of new tools."** To be read as a **doctrinal position statement** from one of the most influential figures in software — echoing ESR's pro-LLM counter-testimony (another pillar of open source, [[raymond-llm-coding-empowering-2026-07-08]]).

## Titre Article

Re: Linking Patchwork with Sashiko? (message linux-media sur la position du kernel Linux vis-à-vis de l'IA)

## Date

2026-07-14

## URL

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/CAHk-=wi4zC+Ze8e+p3tMv8TtG_80KzsZ1syL9anBtmEh5Z40vg@mail.gmail.com/

## Keywords

Linus Torvalds, Linux, Linux kernel, kernel, linux-media, lore.kernel.org, Patchwork, Sashiko, Roman Gushchin, maintainers, maintainers, top-level maintainer, LLM, AI, AI, useful tool, anti-AI, anti-LLM, project stance, open source governance, fork, forking, technical merit, technical merit, fear of new tools, AI economy, embarrassing bugs, maintainer burden, natural intelligence, social warrior, religious reasons, better technology, non-coercion, maintainer assistance, patch triage, code review, open source, doctrine, position statement

## Authors

Linus Torvalds (torvalds@linuxfoundation.org) — ingénieur logiciel finlando-américain, **créateur et mainteneur suprême du noyau Linux** (depuis 1991) et de **Git** (2005). Employé de la **Linux Foundation**. Figure centrale et notoirement franche de l'open source, dont la parole sur les mailing lists du kernel fait autorité et jurisprudence dans la communauté. S'exprime ici en sa qualité de **top-level maintainer** pour fixer la position officielle du projet vis-à-vis des outils d'IA. Autres participants au thread cités : Roman Gushchin (linux.dev), Laurent Pinchart, Mauro Carvalho Chehab, Konstantin Ryabitsev (Linux Foundation), Steven Rostedt, Stephen Finucane, Jason Gunthorpe, entre autres. (Message de mailing list linux-media ; date : 2026-07-14 ; date d'ajout à la veille : 2026-07-17.)

## Ton

**Profile**: a technical mailing-list message in a **directive, doctrinal** register, posted by an authority who **settles** a community debate. This isn't one opinion among others: Torvalds **sets the project's policy** ("put my foot down as the top-level maintainer") and owns the non-negotiable nature of his decision.

**Style**: characteristic of Torvalds — **direct, sharp, vivid, no detours**. A deliberate ultimatum ("fork it. Or just walk away"), exclamations ("Christ"), evocative imagery (the ostrich singing "La La La, I can't hear you", the mirror of natural intelligence), emphatic capitals ("*NOT* some kind of 'social warrior' project"). The message combines **technical pragmatism** (AI as a tool judged on its merit, not on fear), **honesty about costs** (the tool is "painful", finds "embarrassing bugs") and a clear **ideological boundary**: the kernel is a *technology* project, not an *activist* one. Governance tone: non-coercive on usage, but **uncompromising against those who would ban it for others**.

## Pense-betes

- **The official position, settled by the supreme authority.** Worth keeping verbatim: **"Linux is not an anti-AI project"**, and Torvalds **"puts his foot down"** as top-level maintainer. Disagreement isn't censored, but it is **outside the project's policy**: "do the open source thing, fork it — or leave". A rare case where a major open source project's AI doctrine is **explicitly stated**.
- **The thesis in one sentence: "AI is a tool, and clearly a useful tool."** Usefulness **is no longer an open question** ("it may not have been a year ago, it isn't now"). Torvalds **separates two debates**: (a) *questions still open* — notably **"what the AI economy will look like"**; (b) *the settled question* — **"is it useful?"**. Jab: "anybody who doubts that **clearly hasn't actually tried it**".
- **Honesty about the cost — AI is "painful".** Notable concession: **maintainer** overload, and AI "keeps finding **embarrassing bugs**". But the response isn't the **ostrich** approach ("La La La, I can't hear you"): it's **making sure LLMs _help_ maintainers** instead of harming them (the whole point of the Patchwork↔Sashiko thread).
- **Governance: non-coercion + intransigence.** Key formula: **"nobody is forced to use it, but I will very loudly ignore those who try to prevent others from using it"**. Freedom to use it is protected; an **anti-AI veto imposed on others** is not.
- **"Natural intelligence isn't always all that great either."** A rebuttal to the charge that AI is imperfect: whoever points at its flaws "had better also point at the mirror". Worth keeping to defuse the human/AI double standard.
- **Ideological boundary: technology, not activism.** The kernel "**has always been and will remain about technology**"; the social angle of open source is a **side benefit, not the point**; **"this is *NOT* a social warrior project"**. We do open source "because it results in **better technology**, not for religious reasons". Program-punchline: **"decisions based on technical merit first — not fear of new tools"**.
- **Context: Patchwork ↔ Sashiko.** The concrete debate is about **linking Patchwork** (the kernel's email-based patch tracker) with **Sashiko** (an LLM maintainer-assistance tool). The adverse objection: doing so would make "Sashiko's purpose — helping maintainers — unreachable" if every use case had to be complicated to avoid LLMs. Torvalds reframes it: the real issue isn't *how to complicate things*, it's *accepting that LLMs help*.
- **Watch use**: a **doctrinal position statement** (not reporting), with high symbolic value — two **pillars of open source** (Torvalds here, ESR in [[raymond-llm-coding-empowering-2026-07-08]]) display in July 2026 a **pro-LLM pragmatism** against the "anti-AI" camp. Useful for the thesis that "coding AI adoption plays out in community governance, not just tooling", and as an **authoritative counterpoint** to disillusionment narratives.

## RésuméDe400mots

In a message on the **linux-media** mailing list (thread "Linking Patchwork with Sashiko?", about an LLM tool for maintainer assistance), **Linus Torvalds** — creator and **supreme maintainer of the Linux kernel** — **sets the project's official position on AI**.

**The verdict.** Roman Gushchin observed that an adverse message expressed "a very anti-LLM in general" stance. Torvalds agrees ("Yes"), then **denies that this is the kernel's line**: **"Linux is not an anti-AI project"**, and he **"puts his foot down" as top-level maintainer**. Those who take issue with that can **"do the open source thing: fork it"** — "or just walk away".

**The thesis.** **"AI is a tool, like others, and clearly a useful tool."** That may not have been "so clear a year ago, it's no longer in question today". He distinguishes **open questions** ("what the AI economy will actually look like in the end") from the **settled question** ("is it useful?"): "anybody who doubts that **hasn't really tried it**".

**The costs, acknowledged.** AI can be a **"painful"** tool — for **maintainer** burden, and because it "keeps finding **embarrassing bugs**". But the response isn't the **ostrich** approach ("La La La, I can't hear you"): it's **making sure LLMs _help_** maintainers rather than harming them.

**Governance.** **"Nobody is forced to use it, but I will very loudly ignore those who try to prevent others from using it."** On imperfection: "AI isn't perfect, but anybody who points at its problems had better also look in the mirror — **natural intelligence isn't always all that great either**".

**The framework.** The kernel project "has always been and will remain about **technology**"; the social angle of open source is a **side benefit, not the point**; **"this is *NOT* a 'social warrior' project"**. We do open source "because it results in **better technology**, not for religious reasons". Hence the program-conclusion: **"we decide based on technical merit first. Not on fear of new tools."**

An authoritative **doctrinal position statement**, to be read alongside Eric S. Raymond's pro-LLM counter-testimony, another pillar of open source.

## GrapheDeConnaissance

- Linus Torvalds —dirige→ Linux (TECHNOLOGIE, 0.98)
- Linus Torvalds —affirme_que→ l'IA est un outil comme les autres, et clairement un outil utile (AFFIRMATION, 0.95)
- Linus Torvalds —affirme_que→ Linux n'est pas un projet anti-IA ; c'est la position officielle du kernel (AFFIRMATION, 0.95)
- Linus Torvalds —affirme_que→ l'utilité de l'IA n'est plus une question ouverte ; quiconque en doute n'a pas vraiment essayé (AFFIRMATION, 0.9)
- Linus Torvalds —affirme_que→ l'IA peut être un outil douloureux (charge des mainteneurs) mais trouve des bugs embarrassants (AFFIRMATION, 0.85)
- Linus Torvalds —recommande→ faire en sorte que les outils LLM aident les mainteneurs plutôt que de leur causer de la peine (AFFIRMATION, 0.9)
- Linus Torvalds —affirme_que→ on ne force personne à utiliser l'IA, mais il ignorera bruyamment ceux qui veulent empêcher les autres de l'utiliser (AFFIRMATION, 0.9)
- Linus Torvalds —affirme_que→ le projet kernel décide d'abord sur le mérite technique, pas sur la peur des nouveaux outils (AFFIRMATION, 0.9)
- Linus Torvalds —affirme_que→ le kernel est un projet technologique, pas un projet de social warrior ; l'angle social est un bénéfice secondaire (AFFIRMATION, 0.85)
- Linus Torvalds —affirme_que→ l'économie de l'IA reste une question ouverte, contrairement à son utilité (AFFIRMATION, 0.8)
- Sashiko —permet→ aider les mainteneurs du kernel via des LLM (AFFIRMATION, 0.8)
- Sashiko —s_applique_à→ Patchwork (TECHNOLOGIE, 0.75)
- LLM —permet→ trouver des bugs embarrassants dans le code (AFFIRMATION, 0.8)
- Roman Gushchin —soutient→ l'usage des LLM pour aider les mainteneurs (Sashiko) (AFFIRMATION, 0.8)

---
Canonical: https://www.thekb.eu/en/fiches/torvalds-llm-outil-kernel-2026-07-14/