[v2] eal: fix spelling errors
diff mbox series

Message ID 20200310163520.9009-1-stephen@networkplumber.org
State Accepted, archived
Delegated to: Thomas Monjalon
Headers show
Series
  • [v2] eal: fix spelling errors
Related show

Checks

Context Check Description
ci/Intel-compilation success Compilation OK
ci/travis-robot success Travis build: passed
ci/iol-mellanox-Performance success Performance Testing PASS
ci/iol-testing success Testing PASS
ci/checkpatch success coding style OK

Commit Message

Stephen Hemminger March 10, 2020, 4:35 p.m. UTC
Fix spelling errors in comments (found with codespell).

Note that "inbetween" is not correct in English and should
either be two words or better yet, the in can be dropped.
https://www.grammarly.com/blog/in-between-or-inbetween/

Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
---
v2 - drop mistaken fix to arm/rte_atomic_64.h

 lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_fbarray.c             | 2 +-
 lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/arm/rte_cycles_32.h | 2 +-
 lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/x86/rte_atomic.h    | 2 +-
 lib/librte_eal/common/malloc_elem.c                    | 2 +-
 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Comments

Thomas Monjalon April 24, 2020, 4:28 p.m. UTC | #1
10/03/2020 17:35, Stephen Hemminger:
> Fix spelling errors in comments (found with codespell).
> 
> Note that "inbetween" is not correct in English and should
> either be two words or better yet, the in can be dropped.
> https://www.grammarly.com/blog/in-between-or-inbetween/
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>

Applied, thanks

Patch
diff mbox series

diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_fbarray.c b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_fbarray.c
index 1312f936b833..4f8f1af73cd6 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_fbarray.c
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_fbarray.c
@@ -1337,7 +1337,7 @@  fbarray_find_biggest(struct rte_fbarray *arr, unsigned int start, bool used,
 	 */
 
 	/* the API's called are thread-safe, but something may still happen
-	 * inbetween the API calls, so lock the fbarray. all other API's are
+	 * between the API calls, so lock the fbarray. all other API's are
 	 * read-locking the fbarray, so read lock here is OK.
 	 */
 	rte_rwlock_read_lock(&arr->rwlock);
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/arm/rte_cycles_32.h b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/arm/rte_cycles_32.h
index 859b09748c56..f79718ce8ca7 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/arm/rte_cycles_32.h
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/arm/rte_cycles_32.h
@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@  __rte_rdtsc_syscall(void)
  *      asm volatile("mcr p15, 0, %0, c9, c12, 0" : : "r"(29));
  *      asm volatile("mcr p15, 0, %0, c9, c12, 1" : : "r"(0x8000000f));
  *
- * which is possible only from the priviledged mode (kernel space).
+ * which is possible only from the privileged mode (kernel space).
  */
 static inline uint64_t
 __rte_rdtsc_pmccntr(void)
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/x86/rte_atomic.h b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/x86/rte_atomic.h
index 148398f50ab7..b9dcd30aba9a 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/x86/rte_atomic.h
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/x86/rte_atomic.h
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@  extern "C" {
  *
  * As pointed by Java guys, that makes possible to use lock-prefixed
  * instructions to get the same effect as mfence and on most modern HW
- * that gives a better perfomance then using mfence:
+ * that gives a better performance then using mfence:
  * https://shipilev.net/blog/2014/on-the-fence-with-dependencies/
  * Basic idea is to use lock prefixed add with some dummy memory location
  * as the destination. From their experiments 128B(2 cache lines) below
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/malloc_elem.c b/lib/librte_eal/common/malloc_elem.c
index 885d00424bd4..51cdfc5d599b 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/common/malloc_elem.c
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/malloc_elem.c
@@ -171,7 +171,7 @@  malloc_elem_insert(struct malloc_elem *elem)
 		next_elem = NULL;
 		heap->last = elem;
 	} else {
-		/* the new memory is somewhere inbetween start and end */
+		/* the new memory is somewhere between start and end */
 		uint64_t dist_from_start, dist_from_end;
 
 		dist_from_end = RTE_PTR_DIFF(heap->last, elem);