On 04/28/2018 12:16 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On 4/27/18 5:13 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: >> On 04/27/2018 01:00 PM, tip-bot for Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> Commit-ID: 5f26c50143f58f256535bee8d93a105f36d4d2da >>> Gitweb: >>> https://git.kernel.org/tip/5f26c50143f58f256535bee8d93a105f36d4d2da >>> Author: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> >>> AuthorDate: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 11:54:40 +0200 >>> Committer: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> >>> CommitDate: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 12:42:04 +0200 >>> >>> x86/bpf: Clean up non-standard comments, to make the code more readable >>> >>> So by chance I looked into x86 assembly in arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c and >>> noticed the weird and inconsistent comment style it mistakenly learned from >>> the networking code: >>> >>> /* Multi-line comment ... >>> * ... looks like this. >>> */ >>> [...] >>> No change in functionality. >> >> Thanks for the cleanup, looks fine to me! > > same here. thanks for the cleanup! > >>> ( In case this commit causes conflicts with pending development code >>> I'll be glad to help resolve any conflicts! ) >> >> Any objections if we would simply route this via bpf-next tree, otherwise >> this will indeed cause really ugly merge conflicts throughout the JIT with >> pending work.
Since no one hollered I've cherry picked this into bpf-next tree so that upcoming BPF work can be rebased on top of this, thanks Ingo! > right. would be much better to route this patch via bpf-next. > Though all the changes are cleanups in comments I'm pretty sure > they will conflict with other changes we're doing. > > Ingo, > could you please drop this patch from tip tree and resend it to us? > I cannot find the original patch in any public mailing list. > Only in tip-bot notification. > > Personally I don't care whether bpf jit code uses networking > or non-networking style of comments, but will be happy to enforce > non-networking for this file in the future, since that seems to be the > preference. > > Thanks
