[EN] add eBPF

[MaryamTavakkoli]

Describe your changes

Added a new term - eBPF

Related issue number or link (ex: resolves #issue-number)

Resolves #1448

Checklist before opening this PR (put x in the checkboxes)

• This PR does not contain plagiarism
  • don’t copy other people’s work unless you are quoting and contributing it to them.
• I have signed off on all commits
  • signing off (ex: git commit -s) is to affirm that commits comply DCO. If you are working locally, you could add an alias to your gitconfig by running git config --global alias.ci "commit -s".

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for cncfglossary ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	491c19c
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/cncfglossary/deploys/64de3765ecb360000877da5e
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-2050--cncfglossary.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[CathPag]

Thanks, @MaryamTavakkoli. We are still working on pod and stateless apps. Next is runtime and then we'll tackle this PR . Thanks for your patience!

[CathPag]

Thanks for your contribution and patience, @MaryamTavakkoli!
I reviewed the first section, made some light edits, moved one section up, and have a few questions.

[MaryamTavakkoli]

@CathPag I applied all the suggestions, please have another look :)

[CathPag]

Great! Next time, the easiest thing is to simply click on "sign off and commit suggestion." That will automatically resolve the comment. To merge, all comments must be resolved. If you have a different point of few, you can also start a conversation :) One suggestion had a question that we need to address, though.

[MaryamTavakkoli]

@CathPag I made some edit suggestions to cover your comment about security risks. Let me know what you think.

[MaryamTavakkoli]

@CathPag I see you have pushed the suggestions, thanks! Can you help me understand what is the next step? It shows some checks were not successful (un-signed commits) and some spell-checking. But both seem correct to me (all commits are signed and spells sound fine!), and I don't understand what is wrong.

[CathPag]

We need a technical reviewer to have a look as well. Unfortunately, we have a little bit of a backlog right now. But another round of reviews needed.

As to the spellcheck error, eBPF needs to be added to the "wordlist.txt" file. You can find instructions here.

[nate-double-u]

Thanks for this @MaryamTavakkoli!

I've gone through and made some specific technical suggestions in line.

We should also consider mentioning other areas where eBPF is useful, like networking, observability, and security. I don't know if these are key to the definition, but they may provide more context around why eBPF is important.

[MaryamTavakkoli]

Thanks for this @MaryamTavakkoli!

I've gone through and made some specific technical suggestions in line.

We should also consider mentioning other areas where eBPF is useful, like networking, observability, and security. I don't know if these are key to the definition, but they may provide more context around why eBPF is important.

@nate-double-u Thanks for the suggestions. I applied those suggestions now. Is this in good shape now or we should still add more content?

Thanks for making the updates @MaryamTavakkoli! This looks good to me from a technical standpoint.

[MaryamTavakkoli]

Also, quick note that we improved our review process, which is now more transparent, @MaryamTavakkoli. You can see our review board here. I just completed runtime, so I started with the eBPF editorial review (the last step). We know the process isn't super fast, but hope that, with the increased transparency, it will help contributors understand where we are in the process.

Thanks for the explanation @CathPag, it makes it easier to understand how the process works :)

[CathPag]

Done with the 2nd part. I've got many questions, though, sorry, @MaryamTavakkoli! Since I'm non-technical, I serve as the "guinea pig" to ensure these definitions are understandable for that audience as well.

[CathPag]

Question: reading through "the problem it addresses" it seems like eBFP is not a "Linux kernel model", but an alternative...or am I getting this wrong? If so, we could probably say below: "However, this approach also introduces security risks making eBFP an attractive alternative."

[iamNoah1]

yes.

[MaryamTavakkoli]

Applied this as well.

[iamNoah1]

Left some comments. Suggestions seem to be correct.

[iamNoah1]

please @MaryamTavakkoli also check the spellcheck, there are words missing in the wordlist :) Thanks

[CathPag]

Looks great! I made some minor edits, but this is a solid definition. If these look good to you, @MaryamTavakkoli, we can finalize the edit review and merge 🎉

...and thanks again for your patience while we were onboarding new reviewers and figuring out a new review process!

[MaryamTavakkoli]

Looks great! I made some minor edits, but this is a solid definition. If these look good to you, @MaryamTavakkoli, we can finalize the edit review and merge 🎉

...and thanks again for your patience while we were onboarding new reviewers and figuring out a new review process!

Thanks for the great comments. I applied the suggestions and it seems fine to me to be merged.

[iamNoah1]

finalizing

[iamNoah1]

Thank you so so much @MaryamTavakkoli for your contribution and for your patience while we finalized this new term. Also thanks to all maintainers involved :)

[CathPag]

LGTM