From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mta1.migadu.com (out-166.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.166]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 539913DAAAE for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2026 16:32:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.166 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792341171; cv=none; b=rSxvwJlPLVXPIYa3OfJym4U8TB3Do0NNgtD9Rtk6/zlt8oHgMFTAekmLAN5fWnPTyUjjMxH4R1umN4M9utObCTczkfCw7cmM8m2EHnptk1ii6OlpEj9mWJ4lIlSa7pvqMO26JQLysWnniG7tR9mI7DPScp+gNTdMPtdC8uNVp0U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792341171; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cYFV4Zhdqv7Lx4ML754VZ5O4c2k3efDLoxAKMMwG9uM=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=s4NE0h8u/5MJ9qPxenCi7s/+srnwC2yJ/A0b+I+ZWc4IR0NSbJtHdFpvTzF/UGuGgD0/YUnG/uyPULHIrt1pETtZEV+e8JQ7PXQ8b5cT8tCSq8FlDoOlRa7/XvADNxxKejeiAyYkLwkwGAABoro5PRagH/SAE/0nBwu+rWlLxmE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=B8XLanQP; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.166 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="B8XLanQP" X-Envelope-To: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=cYFV4Zhdqv7Lx4ML754VZ5O4c2k3efDLoxAKMMwG9uM=; c=simple/simple; d=linux.dev; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=key1; t=1792341167; v=1; x=1792945967; b=B8XLanQPcolyiNDtb8rGaSuoh1BTjafb45ilE8yTOBEAEUu705+4Whwri5WNGiJ0qJrCNCUA m+3Za3jVZRQ6L1f8/jseNcr/7Q794Pkmrh3l/bSwZEdt7BUzEqOLs2V/82KzF79G9HMh0ZTbp7G uiacywW2Ojzx/kYgILtRoGnw= X-Envelope-To: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org Received: by smtp.migadu.com with ESMTPS id 1c9fe71dca233eac; Sun, 18 Oct 2026 16:32:46 +0000 X-Mizu-Trace-ID: 1c9fe71dca233eac X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Message-ID: <6ea0eae1-9183-4da4-be7a-3e9436dda5b7@linux.dev> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2026 00:32:37 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 4/6] libbpf: Factor out __bpf_sys_fd helper To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org Cc: andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@kernel.org, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, horms@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com, memxor@gmail.com, martin.lau@linux.dev, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, jolsa@kernel.org, emil@etsalapatis.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev, hawk@kernel.org, john.fastabend@gmail.com, sdf@fomichev.me, rostedt@goodmis.org, mhiramat@kernel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, shuah@kernel.org, kuniyu@google.com, liuhangbin@gmail.com, mkarsten@uwaterloo.ca, masashi.honma@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, martin.lau@kernel.org, mason@kernel.org References: <20261017142649.51047-5-leon.hwang@linux.dev> Content-Language: en-US From: Leon Hwang In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2026/10/17 22:53, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote: >> libbpf: Factor out __bpf_sys_fd helper > > TL;DR: Commit message nit only: subject and body call the new helper > __bpf_sys_fd, but the code names it __sys_bpf_fd. Should the message match? > >> libbpf: Factor out __bpf_sys_fd helper >> >> In the next patch, it also needs to use the extended BPF syscall to >> receive the reported log. >> >> So, factor out __bpf_sys_fd helper. >> >> No functional changes intended. >> >> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang > > This isn't a bug, but the subject and body name the helper __bpf_sys_fd, > while the function the patch adds is: > > +static int __sys_bpf_fd(union bpf_attr *attr, const size_t attr_sz, enum bpf_cmd cmd, > + struct bpf_log_opts *log_opts) > > which follows the existing sys_bpf(), sys_bpf_fd() and sys_bpf_ext_fd() > naming. > > Should the subject and body say __sys_bpf_fd instead, so that searching the > log for the real function name finds this commit? Will change __bpf_sys_fd to __sys_bpf_fd in the subject and body. Thanks, Leon > > > --- > 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/39042048581