[PATCH][net-next] net: filter: replace sk_run_filter with __bpf_prog_run in comments

[PATCH][net-next] net: filter: replace sk_run_filter with __bpf_prog_run in comments

[roy.qing.li]

From: Li RongQing <roy.qing.li@gmail.com> 

sk_run_filter has been renamed as __bpf_prog_run, so replace them in comments

Signed-off-by: Li RongQing <roy.qing.li@gmail.com>
---
 net/core/filter.c |    8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
index fcd3f67..9324601 100644
--- a/net/core/filter.c
+++ b/net/core/filter.c
@@ -51,9 +51,9 @@
  *	@skb: buffer to filter
  *
  * Run the filter code and then cut skb->data to correct size returned by
- * sk_run_filter. If pkt_len is 0 we toss packet. If skb->len is smaller
+ * __bpf_prog_run. If pkt_len is 0 we toss packet. If skb->len is smaller
  * than pkt_len we keep whole skb->data. This is the socket level
- * wrapper to sk_run_filter. It returns 0 if the packet should
+ * wrapper to __bpf_prog_run. It returns 0 if the packet should
  * be accepted or -EPERM if the packet should be tossed.
  *
  */
@@ -567,10 +567,10 @@ err:
 /* Security:
  *
  * A BPF program is able to use 16 cells of memory to store intermediate
- * values (check u32 mem[BPF_MEMWORDS] in sk_run_filter()).
+ * values (check u32 mem[BPF_MEMWORDS] in __bpf_prog_run()).
  *
  * As we dont want to clear mem[] array for each packet going through
- * sk_run_filter(), we check that filter loaded by user never try to read
+ * __bpf_prog_run(), we check that filter loaded by user never try to read
  * a cell if not previously written, and we check all branches to be sure
  * a malicious user doesn't try to abuse us.
  */
-- 
1.7.10.4

Re: [PATCH][net-next] net: filter: replace sk_run_filter with __bpf_prog_run in comments

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 8:37 PM,  <roy.qing.li@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Li RongQing <roy.qing.li@gmail.com>
>
> sk_run_filter has been renamed as __bpf_prog_run, so replace them in comments
>
> Signed-off-by: Li RongQing <roy.qing.li@gmail.com>
> ---
>  net/core/filter.c |    8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
> index fcd3f67..9324601 100644
> --- a/net/core/filter.c
> +++ b/net/core/filter.c
> @@ -51,9 +51,9 @@
>   *     @skb: buffer to filter
>   *
>   * Run the filter code and then cut skb->data to correct size returned by
> - * sk_run_filter. If pkt_len is 0 we toss packet. If skb->len is smaller
> + * __bpf_prog_run. If pkt_len is 0 we toss packet. If skb->len is smaller
>   * than pkt_len we keep whole skb->data. This is the socket level
> - * wrapper to sk_run_filter. It returns 0 if the packet should
> + * wrapper to __bpf_prog_run. It returns 0 if the packet should
>   * be accepted or -EPERM if the packet should be tossed.

not quite. I think in both of the above lines it's better to replace
sk_run_filter with SK_RUN_FILTER

>   *
>   */
> @@ -567,10 +567,10 @@ err:
>  /* Security:
>   *
>   * A BPF program is able to use 16 cells of memory to store intermediate
> - * values (check u32 mem[BPF_MEMWORDS] in sk_run_filter()).
> + * values (check u32 mem[BPF_MEMWORDS] in __bpf_prog_run()).

this just wrong. Better to remove this line.

>   *
>   * As we dont want to clear mem[] array for each packet going through
> - * sk_run_filter(), we check that filter loaded by user never try to read
> + * __bpf_prog_run(), we check that filter loaded by user never try to read

here the change is fine.