From: Thomas de Grivel <thodg@kmx.io>
Subject: Re: [patch] ext4fs rw
To: Thomas de Grivel <thodg@kmx.io>
Cc: tech@openbsd.org
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2026 14:43:19 +0100

Maybe intersting points to remember : if you have theoretical
knowledge of kernel-land an AI has good insights on the workings of
the C code.

On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 2:42 PM Thomas de Grivel <thodg@kmx.io> wrote:
>
> Anyway I'll sue my AI provider if they sue me as I asked for a clean
> room implementation and they immediatly went for the documentation
> which is not under the GPL and OpenBSD code which I cited in the
> copyright notice.
>
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 2:40 PM Thomas de Grivel <thodg@kmx.io> wrote:
> >
> > I think the model was mostly trained on scientific papers on this task
> > and it does not fall under the GPL either to follow instructions in
> > scientific papers I guess.
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 2:37 PM Thomas de Grivel <thodg@kmx.io> wrote:
> > >
> > > But the question is really different : can a non-GPL model produce GPL
> > > code ?? I don't think so.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 2:35 PM Thomas de Grivel <thodg@kmx.io> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm trained on code from GPL programs and did write my own other license after that, is ALL my code GPL also ??
> > > >
> > > > Thomas de Grivel
> > > > https://www.kmx.io/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2026, 12:19 Stuart Henderson <stu@spacehopper.org> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> I mean the models are trained on code from all over the place including
> > > >> GPL code, so are using that as input to what they produce.
> > > >>
> > > >> On 2026/03/21 12:08, Thomas de Grivel wrote:
> > > >> > Well if you mean that the ChatGPT and Claude models are under the GPL
> > > >> > and I can download them for free then I don't know what way I will
> > > >> > take XD
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 8:16 PM Stuart Henderson <stu@spacehopper.org> wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On 2026/03/17 20:04, Thomas de Grivel wrote:
> > > >> > > > https://www.kmx.io/static/patches/OpenBSD-current-ext4fs.diff
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > SHA256 : deeabe0d87b9c839563aa0c2dc67198bc6802ee8aedc100028f5648601b448c6
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 7:26 PM Thomas de Grivel <thodg@kmx.io> wrote:
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Hi tech@,
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Here is a patch to attach ext4fs drives to OpenBSD with full ext4
> > > >> > > > > support (compatible with recent Linux).
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Performances are 610MB/s read/write vs 830MB/s for FFS2 on an NVMe.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > No journalling. Recovery at mount time not tested.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > All tests pass e2fstools / e2fsck without trouble. Please test and
> > > >> > > > > reply without too much flames as I'm rather new to the kernel side of
> > > >> > > > > development.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > I hope this helps,
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Cheers,
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > from your blog entry,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > "No Linux source files were ever read to build this driver. It's pure AI
> > > >> > > (ChatGPT and Claude-code) and careful code reviews and error checking
> > > >> > > and building kernel and rebooting/testing from my part."
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > not sure what the copyright situation is regarding this, certainly those
> > > >> > > LLMs will have been trained on code including GPL...
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >