[bpf-next] libbpf: Fix a couple of typos

Commit Message

Daniel Müller June 1, 2022, 3:40 p.m. UTC

This change fixes a couple of typos that were encountered while studying
the source code.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Müller <[e-mail]>
---
 tools/lib/bpf/btf.c       | 2 +-
 tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h    | 2 +-
 tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.c | 8 ++++----
 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Comments

Song Liu June 1, 2022, 3:55 p.m. UTC | #1

On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 8:40 AM Daniel Müller <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> This change fixes a couple of typos that were encountered while studying
> the source code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Müller <[e-mail]>

Acked-by: Song Liu <[e-mail]>

[e-mail] June 1, 2022, 10:10 p.m. UTC | #2

Hello:

This patch was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master)
by Daniel Borkmann <[e-mail]>:

On Wed,  1 Jun 2022 15:40:25 +0000 you wrote:
> This change fixes a couple of typos that were encountered while studying
> the source code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Müller <[e-mail]>
> ---
>  tools/lib/bpf/btf.c       | 2 +-
>  tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h    | 2 +-
>  tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.c | 8 ++++----
>  3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Here is the summary with links:
  - [bpf-next] libbpf: Fix a couple of typos
    https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/788542f2b407

You are awesome, thank you!

Patch

diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/btf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/btf.c
index 3d6c30d9..2e9c23b 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/btf.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/btf.c
@@ -130,7 +130,7 @@  static inline __u64 ptr_to_u64(const void *ptr)
 
 /* Ensure given dynamically allocated memory region pointed to by *data* with
  * capacity of *cap_cnt* elements each taking *elem_sz* bytes has enough
- * memory to accomodate *add_cnt* new elements, assuming *cur_cnt* elements
+ * memory to accommodate *add_cnt* new elements, assuming *cur_cnt* elements
  * are already used. At most *max_cnt* elements can be ever allocated.
  * If necessary, memory is reallocated and all existing data is copied over,
  * new pointer to the memory region is stored at *data, new memory region
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
index 5b34ca..fa2796 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@  struct bpf_object_open_attr {
 };
 
 struct bpf_object_open_opts {
-	/* size of this struct, for forward/backward compatiblity */
+	/* size of this struct, for forward/backward compatibility */
 	size_t sz;
 	/* object name override, if provided:
 	 * - for object open from file, this will override setting object
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.c b/tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.c
index ba4453..d8ab4c6 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.c
@@ -167,7 +167,7 @@  static bool core_relo_is_enumval_based(enum bpf_core_relo_kind kind)
  * just a parsed access string representation): [0, 1, 2, 3].
  *
  * High-level spec will capture only 3 points:
- *   - intial zero-index access by pointer (&s->... is the same as &s[0]...);
+ *   - initial zero-index access by pointer (&s->... is the same as &s[0]...);
  *   - field 'a' access (corresponds to '2' in low-level spec);
  *   - array element #3 access (corresponds to '3' in low-level spec).
  *
@@ -1148,11 +1148,11 @@  int bpf_core_format_spec(char *buf, size_t buf_sz, const struct bpf_core_spec *s
  * 3. It is supported and expected that there might be multiple flavors
  *    matching the spec. As long as all the specs resolve to the same set of
  *    offsets across all candidates, there is no error. If there is any
- *    ambiguity, CO-RE relocation will fail. This is necessary to accomodate
- *    imprefection of BTF deduplication, which can cause slight duplication of
+ *    ambiguity, CO-RE relocation will fail. This is necessary to accommodate
+ *    imperfection of BTF deduplication, which can cause slight duplication of
  *    the same BTF type, if some directly or indirectly referenced (by
  *    pointer) type gets resolved to different actual types in different
- *    object files. If such situation occurs, deduplicated BTF will end up
+ *    object files. If such a situation occurs, deduplicated BTF will end up
  *    with two (or more) structurally identical types, which differ only in
  *    types they refer to through pointer. This should be OK in most cases and
  *    is not an error.