If your question is “how much review should be applied to making code in LLVM follow LLVM conventions”, then I think that answer is “it depends”. That said, I want to encourage you to make LLVM as a whole better, not just “stay in your lane”. I think we want the LLVM community grow to be more consistent and integrated over time, and want to avoid devolving into subcultures.
LLVM intentionally has a “yes, you can apply common sense judgement to things” policy when it comes to code review. If you are doing mechanical patches (e.g. adopting less_first) that apply to the entire monorepo, then you don’t need everyone in the monorepo to sign off on it. Having some +1 validation from someone is useful, but you don’t need everyone whose code you touch to weigh in.
If you’re changing algorithmic behavior, that’s more complicated. For example, the use of std::map is generally the wrong thing, but mechanically changing all std::map<string,x> to StringMap isn’t safe or correct due to iterator invalidation semantics etc. For changes like that, you should get more careful review.
Does this make sense to you? Is this the question you’re asking?
-Chris