More valuable is actually describing what it does/what it's for. And the article does this:
"""
eBPF is a functionality of linux kernel that allows lightweight execution of user code as a response to kernel events. The events could be hardware/software events, tracing events both static (compiled into code) and dynamic (attached in runtime), etc. The code itself is limited in a sense that it is guaranteed to finish (no loops) and is verified before loading into kernel.
"""
Arguably this is a much more useful description for people who don't know what eBPF is, since "packet filter" makes it sound like it's exclusively for firewalling and/or routing.
If I remember correctly, eBPF originally stood for "Extended Berkeley Packet Filter". However, it's usage changed from a packet filter to general purpose kernel hook system.
A little while after that, eBPF stopped being an acronym and started being the actual name. It, as I understand it, no longer stands for "Extended Berkeley Packet Filter".
In that case I wish they would make a new backronym or change the name. Having acronyms that used to stand for something but now stand for nothing feels like (somewhat common) antipattern.
In modern parlance I believe the desire is to move away from the acronym and have BPF just be a standalone name since its functionality goes beyond a packet filter now.
Originally BPF aka the Berkeley packet filter was written to provide a faster/more lightweight alternative to tcpdump. People realized it was an awesome idea, so they started adding more functionality and it became eBPF/extended berkeley packet filter.
Edit: it is the Berkeley Packet Filter.