代码大模型 / AI 编程

Repairing system crashes discovered by kernel fuzzers like Syzkaller is a critical yet underexplored challenge in software engineering. While recent works have introduced Large Language Model (LLM) based agents for Linux kernel crash-resolution, their evaluation benchmarks are usually static and thus, do not capture the evolving nature of the Linux kernel, and suffer from potential data contamination due to LLM knowledge cutoffs. To address the above problem, we present (i) Live-kBench, an evaluation framework for self-evolving benchmarks that continuously scrapes and evaluates agents on freshly discovered kernel bugs, and (ii) kEnv, an agent-agnostic standardized crash-resolution environment for kernel compilation, execution, and feedback. This design decouples agent workflows from heavy-weight execution, enabling fair and scalable comparison across diverse agent frameworks under identical conditions. To this end, we curate an inaugural dataset of 534 Linux kernel bugs and empirically demonstrate a significant performance gap, with agents achieving up to 25% higher equivalent patch rate on bugs fixed before the LLM knowledge cutoff. Using kEnv, we benchmark three state-of-the-art agents, showing that they resolve 74% of crashes on the first attempt (plausible patches); however only ~20% of generated patches closely match developer fixes. Additionally, exposing crash resolution feedback improves crash resolution rate by 29%. Live-kBench provides the community with an evaluation infrastructure for self-evolving benchmarks that is both time and attribute sensitive; complete with a public dashboard to track agent progress on Linux kernel bugs.

With the increasing complexity of large-scale software systems, identifying all necessary modifications for a specific change is challenging. Co-changed methods, which are methods frequently modified together, are crucial for understanding software dependencies. However, existing methods often produce large results with high false positives. Focusing on pull requests instead of individual commits provides a more comprehensive view of related changes, capturing essential co-change relationships. To address these challenges, we propose a learning-to-rank approach that combines source code features and change history to predict and rank co-changed methods at the pull-request level. Experiments on 150 open-source Java projects, totaling 41.5 million lines of code and 634,216 pull requests, show that the Random Forest model outperforms other models by 2.5 to 12.8 percent in NDCG@5. It also surpasses baselines such as file proximity, code clones, FCP2Vec, and StarCoder 2 by 4.7 to 537.5 percent. Models trained on longer historical data (90 to 180 days) perform consistently, while accuracy declines after 60 days, highlighting the need for bi-monthly retraining. This approach provides an effective tool for managing co-changed methods, enabling development teams to handle dependencies and maintain software quality.