Re: [PATCH 04/35] Documentation: bpf: correct spelling

[David Vernet <void@manifault.com>]

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@infradead.org>
> Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
> Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
> Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
> ---
>  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.