A kernel-patch figure that contradicts its own chart

The post reads, in full: "Yet another record week for AI development of Linux. Last week there were 1,634 code submissions to the Linux Kernel which were written by AI. So far, in September, AI generated code has made up 17.25% of all Linux Kernel patches." Two charts are attached. The first carries the title "Patches Assisted By AI LLM / Week" on the image itself, a weekly bar series legible from late February to late August and rising over that span. The second is a monthly percentage series, cropped in the carousel, legible at 0.33% for February and 0.83% for March. The post states no method for classifying a patch and no denominator. At 12:15 EDT on September 21 it showed 5,048 views, 85 likes and 11 reposts. The Hacker News thread carrying it stood at 31 points against 71 comments at 12:17 EDT, more than two comments for every point, which is what a contested claim looks like rather than an endorsed one.

Why it matters: If you are trying to work out how much accepted upstream work agents are actually doing, this is the number people will cite at you. The gap between the prose and the chart's own label is the whole question. A patch a human wrote with completion assistance and a patch an agent produced end to end are different facts about software production, and one count cannot stand for both. Ask what the classifier was before you repeat the percentage.