lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 07:15:28 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bpf, docs: prune all references to "internal BPF" On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 12:09:02AM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > Thanks for the cleanup! For the code occurrences with 'internal BPF', I would > just drop the term 'internal' so it's only 'BPF' which is consistent with the > rest in the kernel. Usually eBPF is implied given all the old cBPF stuff is > translated to it anyway. Bit confusing, but that's where it converged over the > years in the kernel including git log. eBPF vs cBPF unless it's explicitly > intended to be called out (like in the filter.rst docs). Ok. > nit: We can probably just drop that comment since it's not very useful anyway > and already implied by the function name. Sounds good.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists