@@ -4557,7 +4557,7 @@ static int backtrack_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int idx, int subseq_idx,
4557
4557
* . if (scalar cond K|scalar)
4558
4558
* . helper_call(.., scalar, ...) where ARG_CONST is expected
4559
4559
* backtrack through the verifier states and mark all registers and
4560
- * stack slots with spilled constants that these scalar regisers
4560
+ * stack slots with spilled constants that these scalar registers
4561
4561
* should be precise.
4562
4562
* . during state pruning two registers (or spilled stack slots)
4563
4563
* are equivalent if both are not precise.
@@ -18489,7 +18489,7 @@ static void clean_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
18489
18489
/* the parentage chains form a tree.
18490
18490
* the verifier states are added to state lists at given insn and
18491
18491
* pushed into state stack for future exploration.
18492
- * when the verifier reaches bpf_exit insn some of the verifer states
18492
+ * when the verifier reaches bpf_exit insn some of the verifier states
18493
18493
* stored in the state lists have their final liveness state already,
18494
18494
* but a lot of states will get revised from liveness point of view when
18495
18495
* the verifier explores other branches.
@@ -19205,7 +19205,7 @@ static bool is_iter_next_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx)
19205
19205
* terminology) calls specially: as opposed to bounded BPF loops, it *expects*
19206
19206
* states to match, which otherwise would look like an infinite loop. So while
19207
19207
* iter_next() calls are taken care of, we still need to be careful and
19208
- * prevent erroneous and too eager declaration of "ininite loop", when
19208
+ * prevent erroneous and too eager declaration of "infinite loop", when
19209
19209
* iterators are involved.
19210
19210
*
19211
19211
* Here's a situation in pseudo-BPF assembly form:
@@ -19247,7 +19247,7 @@ static bool is_iter_next_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx)
19247
19247
*
19248
19248
* This approach allows to keep infinite loop heuristic even in the face of
19249
19249
* active iterator. E.g., C snippet below is and will be detected as
19250
- * inifintely looping:
19250
+ * infinitely looping:
19251
19251
*
19252
19252
* struct bpf_iter_num it;
19253
19253
* int *p, x;
@@ -24488,7 +24488,7 @@ static int compute_scc(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
24488
24488
* if pre[i] == 0:
24489
24489
* recur(i)
24490
24490
*
24491
- * Below implementation replaces explicit recusion with array 'dfs'.
24491
+ * Below implementation replaces explicit recursion with array 'dfs'.
24492
24492
*/
24493
24493
for (i = 0; i < insn_cnt; i++) {
24494
24494
if (pre[i])
0 commit comments