Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/3] bpf: Add bpf_arch_supports_fsession()

[Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>]

On 2026/1/28 23:26, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
>> index 5a075e06cf..070ba80e39 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
>> @@ -4112,3 +4112,8 @@ bool bpf_jit_supports_timed_may_goto(void)
>>  {
>>  	return true;
>>  }
>> +
>> +bool bpf_jit_supports_fsession(void)
>        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> This is the actual function name in the code.
> 

There is no issue here.

bpf_jit_supports_fsession() follows the same pattern as other
bpf_jit_supports_*() helpers: it is declared in filter.h, provided as a
__weak default implementation in core.c, and overridden by individual
JIT backends as needed.

Thanks,
Leon


>> +{
>> +	return true;
>> +}
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
>> index e0b8a8a5aa..3b1eb632bf 100644
>> --- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
>> @@ -3142,6 +3142,11 @@ bool __weak bpf_jit_supports_insn(struct bpf_insn *insn, bool in_arena)
>>  	return false;
>>  }
>> +
>> +bool __weak bpf_jit_supports_fsession(void)
>> +{
>> +	return false;
>> +}
> 
> 
> ---
> AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug.
> See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md
> 
> CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/21443677441
> 
> AI-authorship-score: low
> AI-authorship-explanation: The naming inconsistency between commit message and code suggests a human renaming the function during development without updating the commit message, not AI-generated content.
> issues-found: 1
> issue-severity-score: low
> issue-severity-explanation: Documentation-only issue - commit message function name does not match actual code, which may confuse future code archaeology but has no runtime impact.