On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 10:39:34PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > Correct spelling problems for Documentation/bpf/ as reported > by codespell. > > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> > Cc: linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > --- > Documentation/bpf/libbpf/libbpf_naming_convention.rst | 6 +++--- > Documentation/bpf/map_xskmap.rst | 2 +- > Documentation/bpf/ringbuf.rst | 4 ++-- > Documentation/bpf/verifier.rst | 2 +- > 4 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff -- a/Documentation/bpf/libbpf/libbpf_naming_convention.rst b/Documentation/bpf/libbpf/libbpf_naming_convention.rst > --- a/Documentation/bpf/libbpf/libbpf_naming_convention.rst > +++ b/Documentation/bpf/libbpf/libbpf_naming_convention.rst > @@ -83,8 +83,8 @@ This prevents from accidentally exportin > to be a part of ABI what, in turn, improves both libbpf developer- and > user-experiences. > > -ABI versionning > ---------------- > +ABI versioning > +-------------- > > To make future ABI extensions possible libbpf ABI is versioned. > Versioning is implemented by ``libbpf.map`` version script that is > @@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ API documentation convention > The libbpf API is documented via comments above definitions in > header files. These comments can be rendered by doxygen and sphinx > for well organized html output. This section describes the > -convention in which these comments should be formated. > +convention in which these comments should be formatted. > > Here is an example from btf.h: > > diff -- a/Documentation/bpf/map_xskmap.rst b/Documentation/bpf/map_xskmap.rst > --- a/Documentation/bpf/map_xskmap.rst > +++ b/Documentation/bpf/map_xskmap.rst > @@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ The following code snippet shows how to > > For an example on how create AF_XDP sockets, please see the AF_XDP-example and > AF_XDP-forwarding programs in the `bpf-examples`_ directory in the `libxdp`_ repository. > -For a detailed explaination of the AF_XDP interface please see: > +For a detailed explanation of the AF_XDP interface please see: > > - `libxdp-readme`_. > - `AF_XDP`_ kernel documentation. > diff -- a/Documentation/bpf/ringbuf.rst b/Documentation/bpf/ringbuf.rst > --- a/Documentation/bpf/ringbuf.rst > +++ b/Documentation/bpf/ringbuf.rst > @@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ buffer. Currently 4 are supported: > > - ``BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA`` returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; > - ``BPF_RB_RING_SIZE`` returns the size of ring buffer; > -- ``BPF_RB_CONS_POS``/``BPF_RB_PROD_POS`` returns current logical possition > +- ``BPF_RB_CONS_POS``/``BPF_RB_PROD_POS`` returns current logical position > of consumer/producer, respectively. > > Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be > @@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ Design and Implementation > This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either > on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve > independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This > -means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the > +means that if BPF program was interrupted by another BPF program sharing the While you're here, could you please also fix this: s/if BPF program/if a BPF program > same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is > enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This > applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during > diff -- a/Documentation/bpf/verifier.rst b/Documentation/bpf/verifier.rst > --- a/Documentation/bpf/verifier.rst > +++ b/Documentation/bpf/verifier.rst > @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ checked and found to be non-NULL, all co > As well as range-checking, the tracked information is also used for enforcing > alignment of pointer accesses. For instance, on most systems the packet pointer > is 2 bytes after a 4-byte alignment. If a program adds 14 bytes to that to jump > -over the Ethernet header, then reads IHL and addes (IHL * 4), the resulting > +over the Ethernet header, then reads IHL and adds (IHL * 4), the resulting > pointer will have a variable offset known to be 4n+2 for some n, so adding the 2 > bytes (NET_IP_ALIGN) gives a 4-byte alignment and so word-sized accesses through > that pointer are safe. Otherwise, LGTM. I'll wait to add stamp until the v2 sent to bpf-next instead of bpf.
