From patchwork Thu Oct 14 21:56:19 2021 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Stephen Hemminger X-Patchwork-Id: 101698 X-Patchwork-Delegate: thomas@monjalon.net Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork@inbox.dpdk.org Delivered-To: patchwork@inbox.dpdk.org Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1565EA0C43; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 23:57:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CAAC4118C; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 23:56:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pg1-f175.google.com (mail-pg1-f175.google.com [209.85.215.175]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BC8641177 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 23:56:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pg1-f175.google.com with SMTP id d23so6742017pgh.8 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 14:56:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6eDQQt7mbeYFWAZZegRwu+tJ79dUHX78AmxKJN9ZSUk=; b=LLy4LnjQaE+0cdkudSZjulcGpkwB3CLqPQsSFRc+yoenS7dYaQvRl+J/plTiOKnR+8 TSLGDeHAUUqt7Ls/LLRYYE1flOyE17a1PWXK1jmriTWAaNV6NGFvCt8ucevqjWCQDWUl cRoizsd8RPciNdlzaM6ZK2zm5OP9aQJ4zJ9pXqqxGkihfmd6J5Qpga0GObZrjeXn29mV 2dVCo4pxyYbD2Lvtxv28dTYdUCjjMc20DV4uHe1EU0bWAMLa7E5//hx7us9oLtv2MmhT tPwNwP7UifH0x9uKQIIa0szuKJ9mCoHFUR0xjZPfnfDni4ABLUsqHwiwwF8nzsv/2ijc VvzA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6eDQQt7mbeYFWAZZegRwu+tJ79dUHX78AmxKJN9ZSUk=; b=SNhOId+4JMZR8O4cy8USr9VAALhQswnBwR+66UgGSqTtkd2zIyklAFKTx5UC2RNLyw jvefbTXAwiiFMdeeGmnSFJLPsUOQ969OH7yFnL5xkm4G1IGFjlZoG+aXaxZY2lcuGO1b +iC/mOf5T46hNNm2uBKuUP0Mf27uuh/IM1ELkiskh0FslMfOxJUiiJ0CNQmQraEp7jSk XnI8GSdT4T7U6nDMNHoFGr2V5gx6GmCNOXt+i9ByJ1k0iU7dlMPg5C8wY34QMWacfZhE 2mBLwJ8pbbT/tvHsHg5zuQUW/t/VtjMLFP0QjJ/BzxqHjZswXgF4Hj/W40/54ojURk+H 42Bw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Fua+oXSky4EbPrrpUDWCKm9lapqC8oDYTgwShRrZic1CEErtA tq6YDio7MNZHqCB+i6hBZ0mSXNNLHMY+uw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyuqVLg1Hc75SucNKmKiSaSYSuDcI0SXCLhwq7/UAsIbGMu3/YJDSyUQyZEDijjcX2abigSoQ== X-Received: by 2002:a65:6215:: with SMTP id d21mr6304213pgv.62.1634248603986; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 14:56:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.local (204-195-33-123.wavecable.com. [204.195.33.123]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h13sm3076741pgf.14.2021.10.14.14.56.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 14 Oct 2021 14:56:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Stephen Hemminger To: dev@dpdk.org Cc: Stephen Hemminger , Konstantin Ananyev Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 14:56:19 -0700 Message-Id: <20211014215631.181747-7-stephen@networkplumber.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.30.2 In-Reply-To: <20211014215631.181747-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> References: <20210909175648.174258-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20211014215631.181747-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 06/18] bpf: fix spelling in comments X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Found by running codespell on the bpf implementation. Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev --- lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c | 2 +- lib/bpf/bpf_load_elf.c | 2 +- lib/bpf/bpf_pkt.c | 2 +- lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c | 8 ++++---- 4 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c index aa22ea78a01d..518513376a67 100644 --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_jit_x86.c @@ -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; diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_load_elf.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_load_elf.c index 2b11adeb5eb1..02a5d8ba0d07 100644 --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_load_elf.c +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_load_elf.c @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ resolve_xsym(const char *sn, size_t ofs, struct ebpf_insn *ins, size_t ins_sz, if (type == RTE_BPF_XTYPE_FUNC) { /* we don't support multiple functions per BPF module, - * so treat EBPF_PSEUDO_CALL to extrernal function + * so treat EBPF_PSEUDO_CALL to external function * as an ordinary EBPF_CALL. */ if (ins[idx].src_reg == EBPF_PSEUDO_CALL) { diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_pkt.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_pkt.c index 6e8248f0d6e4..701e8e2c62a9 100644 --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_pkt.c +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_pkt.c @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ bpf_eth_cbh_add(struct bpf_eth_cbh *cbh, uint16_t port, uint16_t queue) } /* - * BPF packet processing routinies. + * BPF packet processing routines. */ static inline uint32_t diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c b/lib/bpf/bpf_validate.c index 7b1291b382e9..eb8016ef196c 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 its fields don't violate particular instruction type restrictions. */ static const char * check_syntax(const struct ebpf_insn *ins) @@ -1954,7 +1954,7 @@ log_loop(const struct bpf_verifier *bvf) * First pass goes though all instructions in the set, checks that each * instruction is a valid one (correct syntax, valid field values, etc.) * and constructs control flow graph (CFG). - * Then deapth-first search is performed over the constructed graph. + * Then depth-first search is performed over the constructed graph. * Programs with unreachable instructions and/or loops will be rejected. */ static int @@ -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 other nodes have exactly one * outgoing edge. */ switch (ins->code) { @@ -2251,7 +2251,7 @@ evaluate(struct bpf_verifier *bvf) idx = get_node_idx(bvf, node); op = ins[idx].code; - /* for jcc node make a copy of evaluatoion state */ + /* for jcc node make a copy of evaluation state */ if (node->nb_edge > 1) rc |= save_eval_state(bvf, node);