> 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.
> +{
> + 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.
