On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 7:08 PM YangYuxi <yx.atom1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Signed-off-by: YangYuxi <yx.atom1@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 10 +++++----- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > index 0fd80ac81f70..300ae16baffc 100644 > --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > @@ -1881,13 +1881,13 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog_inc_not_zero(struct bpf_prog *prog) > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(bpf_prog_inc_not_zero); > > bool bpf_prog_get_ok(struct bpf_prog *prog, > - enum bpf_prog_type *attach_type, bool attach_drv) > + enum bpf_prog_type *prog_type, bool attach_drv) > { > /* not an attachment, just a refcount inc, always allow */ > - if (!attach_type) > + if (!prog_type) > return true; I think it makes it worse. Now the comment doesn't match the code. And attach_drv name also looks out of place. Technically program type is also an attach type to some degree. The name could be a bit confusing, but in combination with type: 'enum bpf_prog_type *attach_type' I think it's pretty clear what these functions are doing. So I prefer to keep the code as-is.