[PATCH v2] scripts/checkpatch: add Assisted-by: tag validation

[PATCH v2] scripts/checkpatch: add Assisted-by: tag validation

[Harry Wentland]

The coding-assistants.rst documentation defines the Assisted-by: tag
format for AI-assisted contributions as:

  Assisted-by: AGENT_NAME:MODEL_VERSION [TOOL1] [TOOL2]

This format does not use an email address, so checkpatch currently
reports a false positive about an invalid email when encountering this
tag.

Add Assisted-by: to the recognized signature tags and standard signature
list. When an Assisted-by: tag is found, validate it instead of checking
for an email address.

Examples of passing tags:
- Claude:claude-3-opus coccinelle sparse
- FOO:BAR.baz
- Copilot Github:claude-3-opus
- GitHub Copilot:Claude Opus 4.6
- My Cool Agent:v1.2.3 coccinelle sparse

Examples of tags triggering the new warning:
- Claude coccinelle sparse
- JustAName
- :missing-agent

Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4.6
Co-developed-by: Alex Hung <alex.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Hung <alex.hung@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com>
---
 scripts/checkpatch.pl | 12 +++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index e56374662ff7..b8d961d77ff4 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -641,6 +641,7 @@ our $signature_tags = qr{(?xi:
 	Reviewed-by:|
 	Reported-by:|
 	Suggested-by:|
+	Assisted-by:|
 	To:|
 	Cc:
 )};
@@ -737,7 +738,7 @@ sub find_standard_signature {
 	my ($sign_off) = @_;
 	my @standard_signature_tags = (
 		'Signed-off-by:', 'Co-developed-by:', 'Acked-by:', 'Tested-by:',
-		'Reviewed-by:', 'Reported-by:', 'Suggested-by:'
+		'Reviewed-by:', 'Reported-by:', 'Suggested-by:', 'Assisted-by:'
 	);
 	foreach my $signature (@standard_signature_tags) {
 		return $signature if (get_edit_distance($sign_off, $signature) <= 2);
@@ -3105,6 +3106,15 @@ sub process {
 				}
 			}
 
+# Assisted-by: uses format AGENT_NAME:MODEL_VERSION [TOOL1] [TOOL2] instead of email
+			if ($sign_off =~ /^assisted-by:$/i) {
+				if ($email !~ /^[^:]+:\S+(\s+\S+)*$/) {
+					WARN("BAD_ASSISTED_BY",
+					     "Assisted-by: should use format: 'Assisted-by: AGENT_NAME:MODEL_VERSION [TOOL1] [TOOL2]'\n" . $herecurr);
+				}
+				next;
+			}
+
 			my ($email_name, $name_comment, $email_address, $comment) = parse_email($email);
 			my $suggested_email = format_email(($email_name, $name_comment, $email_address, $comment));
 			if ($suggested_email eq "") {
-- 
2.53.0

Re: [PATCH v2] scripts/checkpatch: add Assisted-by: tag validation

[Jonathan Corbet]

Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com> writes:

> The coding-assistants.rst documentation defines the Assisted-by: tag
> format for AI-assisted contributions as:
>
>   Assisted-by: AGENT_NAME:MODEL_VERSION [TOOL1] [TOOL2]
>
> This format does not use an email address, so checkpatch currently
> reports a false positive about an invalid email when encountering this
> tag.
>
> Add Assisted-by: to the recognized signature tags and standard signature
> list. When an Assisted-by: tag is found, validate it instead of checking
> for an email address.
>
> Examples of passing tags:
> - Claude:claude-3-opus coccinelle sparse
> - FOO:BAR.baz
> - Copilot Github:claude-3-opus
> - GitHub Copilot:Claude Opus 4.6
> - My Cool Agent:v1.2.3 coccinelle sparse
>
> Examples of tags triggering the new warning:
> - Claude coccinelle sparse
> - JustAName
> - :missing-agent
>
> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
> Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4.6
> Co-developed-by: Alex Hung <alex.hung@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Hung <alex.hung@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com>
> ---
>  scripts/checkpatch.pl | 12 +++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Given that people are running into this problem, and that we *do* want
people using that tag, it would make sense to go ahead and get this in,
perhaps even with a CC: stable.  Would you like me to route it
Linusward, or did you have another path in mind?

Joe, does this look good to you?

Thanks,

jon

Re: [PATCH v2] scripts/checkpatch: add Assisted-by: tag validation

[Joe Perches]

On Fri, 2026-03-27 at 15:28 -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Harry Wentland <[harry.wentland@amd.com](mailto:harry.wentland@amd.com)> writes:
> 
> The coding-assistants.rst documentation defines the Assisted-by: tag
> > format for AI-assisted contributions as:
> > 
> >   Assisted-by: AGENT_NAME:MODEL_VERSION [TOOL1] [TOOL2]
> > 
> > This format does not use an email address, so checkpatch currently
> > reports a false positive about an invalid email when encountering this
> > tag.
> > 
> > Add Assisted-by: to the recognized signature tags and standard signature
> > list. When an Assisted-by: tag is found, validate it instead of checking
> > for an email address.
> > 
> > Examples of passing tags:
> > - Claude:claude-3-opus coccinelle sparse
> > - FOO:BAR.baz
> > - Copilot Github:claude-3-opus
> > - GitHub Copilot:Claude Opus 4.6
> > - My Cool Agent:v1.2.3 coccinelle sparse
> > 
> > Examples of tags triggering the new warning:
> > - Claude coccinelle sparse
> > - JustAName
> > - :missing-agent
> > 
> > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <[corbet@lwn.net](mailto:corbet@lwn.net)>
> > Cc: Jani Nikula <[jani.nikula@linux.intel.com](mailto:jani.nikula@linux.intel.com)>
> > Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4.6
> > Co-developed-by: Alex Hung <[alex.hung@amd.com](mailto:alex.hung@amd.com)>
> > Signed-off-by: Alex Hung <[alex.hung@amd.com](mailto:alex.hung@amd.com)>
> > Signed-off-by: Harry Wentland <[harry.wentland@amd.com](mailto:harry.wentland@amd.com)>
> > ---
> >  scripts/checkpatch.pl | 12 +++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> 
> Given that people are running into this problem, and that we *do* want
> people using that tag, it would make sense to go ahead and get this in,
> perhaps even with a CC: stable.  Would you like me to route it
> Linusward, or did you have another path in mind?
> 
> Joe, does this look good to you?

Looks good.

If you want to take it and push it, fine by me.

Re: [PATCH v2] scripts/checkpatch: add Assisted-by: tag validation

[Jonathan Corbet]

Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> writes:

> On Fri, 2026-03-27 at 15:28 -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> Harry Wentland <[harry.wentland@amd.com](mailto:harry.wentland@amd.com)> writes:
>> 
>> The coding-assistants.rst documentation defines the Assisted-by: tag
>> > format for AI-assisted contributions as:
>> > 
>> >   Assisted-by: AGENT_NAME:MODEL_VERSION [TOOL1] [TOOL2]
>> > 
>> > This format does not use an email address, so checkpatch currently
>> > reports a false positive about an invalid email when encountering this
>> > tag.
>> > 
>> > Add Assisted-by: to the recognized signature tags and standard signature
>> > list. When an Assisted-by: tag is found, validate it instead of checking
>> > for an email address.
>> > 
>> > Examples of passing tags:
>> > - Claude:claude-3-opus coccinelle sparse
>> > - FOO:BAR.baz
>> > - Copilot Github:claude-3-opus
>> > - GitHub Copilot:Claude Opus 4.6
>> > - My Cool Agent:v1.2.3 coccinelle sparse
>> > 
>> > Examples of tags triggering the new warning:
>> > - Claude coccinelle sparse
>> > - JustAName
>> > - :missing-agent
>> > 
>> > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <[corbet@lwn.net](mailto:corbet@lwn.net)>
>> > Cc: Jani Nikula <[jani.nikula@linux.intel.com](mailto:jani.nikula@linux.intel.com)>
>> > Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4.6
>> > Co-developed-by: Alex Hung <[alex.hung@amd.com](mailto:alex.hung@amd.com)>
>> > Signed-off-by: Alex Hung <[alex.hung@amd.com](mailto:alex.hung@amd.com)>
>> > Signed-off-by: Harry Wentland <[harry.wentland@amd.com](mailto:harry.wentland@amd.com)>
>> > ---
>> >  scripts/checkpatch.pl | 12 +++++++++++-
>> >  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> 
>> Given that people are running into this problem, and that we *do* want
>> people using that tag, it would make sense to go ahead and get this in,
>> perhaps even with a CC: stable.  Would you like me to route it
>> Linusward, or did you have another path in mind?
>> 
>> Joe, does this look good to you?
>
> Looks good.
>
> If you want to take it and push it, fine by me.

OK, I have applied it, will ship it upward before too long.

Thanks,

jon