On Thu, 9 Sep 2021 22:49:56 +0300
Dmitry Kozlyuk <dmitry.kozl...@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.
