[v2,06/18] bpf: fix spelling in comments
Checks
Commit Message
Found by running codespell on the bpf implementation.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
---
lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c | 2 +-
lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Comments
2021-09-09 11:10 (UTC-0700), Stephen Hemminger:
[...]
> diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c
> index 7b1291b382e9..3e7d3d730637 100644
> --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c
> +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c
> @@ -1723,7 +1723,7 @@ static const struct bpf_ins_check ins_chk[UINT8_MAX + 1] = {
>
> /*
> * make sure that instruction syntax is valid,
> - * and it fields don't violate partciular instrcution type restrictions.
> + * and it fields don't violate particular instruction type restrictions.
Also "it" -> "its".
> */
> static const char *
> check_syntax(const struct ebpf_insn *ins)
> @@ -1981,7 +1981,7 @@ validate(struct bpf_verifier *bvf)
>
> /*
> * construct CFG, jcc nodes have to outgoing edges,
> - * 'exit' nodes - none, all others nodes have exaclty one
> + * 'exit' nodes - none, all others nodes have exactly one
Also "others" -> "other".
> * outgoing edge.
> */
> switch (ins->code) {
On Thu, 9 Sep 2021 22:49:56 +0300
Dmitry Kozlyuk <dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2021-09-09 11:10 (UTC-0700), Stephen Hemminger:
> [...]
> > diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c
> > index 7b1291b382e9..3e7d3d730637 100644
> > --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c
> > +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c
> > @@ -1723,7 +1723,7 @@ static const struct bpf_ins_check ins_chk[UINT8_MAX + 1] = {
> >
> > /*
> > * make sure that instruction syntax is valid,
> > - * and it fields don't violate partciular instrcution type restrictions.
> > + * and it fields don't violate particular instruction type restrictions.
>
> Also "it" -> "its".
>
> > */
> > static const char *
> > check_syntax(const struct ebpf_insn *ins)
> > @@ -1981,7 +1981,7 @@ validate(struct bpf_verifier *bvf)
> >
> > /*
> > * construct CFG, jcc nodes have to outgoing edges,
> > - * 'exit' nodes - none, all others nodes have exaclty one
> > + * 'exit' nodes - none, all others nodes have exactly one
>
> Also "others" -> "other".
>
> > * outgoing edge.
> > */
> > switch (ins->code) {
>
Good catch, codespell and others don't check grammar.
@@ -1245,7 +1245,7 @@ emit_epilog(struct bpf_jit_state *st)
uint32_t i;
int32_t spil, ofs;
- /* if we allready have an epilog generate a jump to it */
+ /* if we already have an epilog generate a jump to it */
if (st->exit.num++ != 0) {
emit_abs_jmp(st, st->exit.off);
return;
@@ -1723,7 +1723,7 @@ static const struct bpf_ins_check ins_chk[UINT8_MAX + 1] = {
/*
* make sure that instruction syntax is valid,
- * and it fields don't violate partciular instrcution type restrictions.
+ * and it fields don't violate particular instruction type restrictions.
*/
static const char *
check_syntax(const struct ebpf_insn *ins)
@@ -1981,7 +1981,7 @@ validate(struct bpf_verifier *bvf)
/*
* construct CFG, jcc nodes have to outgoing edges,
- * 'exit' nodes - none, all others nodes have exaclty one
+ * 'exit' nodes - none, all others nodes have exactly one
* outgoing edge.
*/
switch (ins->code) {