Merge pull request #45172 from alexis974/spelling-mistake-kube-scheduler

Fix spelling mistake in kube scheduler

Author: k8s-ci-robot

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/api-eviction.md

@@ -11,11 +11,11 @@ using a client of the {{<glossary_tooltip term_id="kube-apiserver" text="API ser
 creates an `Eviction` object, which causes the API server to terminate the Pod.
 
 API-initiated evictions respect your configured [`PodDisruptionBudgets`](/docs/tasks/run-application/configure-pdb/)
-and [`terminationGracePeriodSeconds`](/docs/concepts/workloads/pods/pod-lifecycle#pod-termination). 
+and [`terminationGracePeriodSeconds`](/docs/concepts/workloads/pods/pod-lifecycle#pod-termination).
 
 Using the API to create an Eviction object for a Pod is like performing a
 policy-controlled [`DELETE` operation](/docs/reference/kubernetes-api/workload-resources/pod-v1/#delete-delete-a-pod)
-on the Pod. 
+on the Pod.
 
 ## Calling the Eviction API
 
@@ -75,13 +75,13 @@ checks and responds in one of the following ways:
 * `429 Too Many Requests`: the eviction is not currently allowed because of the
   configured {{<glossary_tooltip term_id="pod-disruption-budget" text="PodDisruptionBudget">}}.
   You may be able to attempt the eviction again later. You might also see this
-  response because of API rate limiting. 
+  response because of API rate limiting.
 * `500 Internal Server Error`: the eviction is not allowed because there is a
   misconfiguration, like if multiple PodDisruptionBudgets reference the same Pod.
 
 If the Pod you want to evict isn't part of a workload that has a
 PodDisruptionBudget, the API server always returns `200 OK` and allows the
-eviction. 
+eviction.
 
 If the API server allows the eviction, the Pod is deleted as follows:
 
@@ -103,12 +103,12 @@ If the API server allows the eviction, the Pod is deleted as follows:
 ## Troubleshooting stuck evictions
 
 In some cases, your applications may enter a broken state, where the Eviction
-API will only return `429` or `500` responses until you intervene. This can 
-happen if, for example, a ReplicaSet creates pods for your application but new 
+API will only return `429` or `500` responses until you intervene. This can
+happen if, for example, a ReplicaSet creates pods for your application but new
 pods do not enter a `Ready` state. You may also notice this behavior in cases
 where the last evicted Pod had a long termination grace period.
 
-If you notice stuck evictions, try one of the following solutions: 
+If you notice stuck evictions, try one of the following solutions:
 
 * Abort or pause the automated operation causing the issue. Investigate the stuck
   application before you restart the operation.

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/assign-pod-node.md

@@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ define. Some of the benefits of affinity and anti-affinity include:
 The affinity feature consists of two types of affinity:
 
 - *Node affinity* functions like the `nodeSelector` field but is more expressive and
-  allows you to specify soft rules. 
+  allows you to specify soft rules.
 - *Inter-pod affinity/anti-affinity* allows you to constrain Pods against labels
   on other Pods.
 
@@ -254,13 +254,13 @@ the node label that the system uses to denote the domain. For examples, see
 [Well-Known Labels, Annotations and Taints](/docs/reference/labels-annotations-taints/).
 
 {{< note >}}
-Inter-pod affinity and anti-affinity require substantial amount of
+Inter-pod affinity and anti-affinity require substantial amounts of
 processing which can slow down scheduling in large clusters significantly. We do
 not recommend using them in clusters larger than several hundred nodes.
 {{< /note >}}
 
 {{< note >}}
-Pod anti-affinity requires nodes to be consistently labelled, in other words,
+Pod anti-affinity requires nodes to be consistently labeled, in other words,
 every node in the cluster must have an appropriate label matching `topologyKey`.
 If some or all nodes are missing the specified `topologyKey` label, it can lead
 to unintended behavior.
@@ -305,22 +305,22 @@ Pod affinity rule uses the "hard"
 `requiredDuringSchedulingIgnoredDuringExecution`, while the anti-affinity rule
 uses the "soft" `preferredDuringSchedulingIgnoredDuringExecution`.
 
-The affinity rule specifies that the scheduler is allowed to place the example Pod 
+The affinity rule specifies that the scheduler is allowed to place the example Pod
 on a node only if that node belongs to a specific [zone](/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints/)
-where other Pods have been labeled with `security=S1`. 
-For instance, if we have a cluster with a designated zone, let's call it "Zone V," 
-consisting of nodes labeled with `topology.kubernetes.io/zone=V`, the scheduler can 
-assign the Pod to any node within Zone V, as long as there is at least one Pod within 
-Zone V already labeled with `security=S1`. Conversely, if there are no Pods with `security=S1` 
+where other Pods have been labeled with `security=S1`.
+For instance, if we have a cluster with a designated zone, let's call it "Zone V,"
+consisting of nodes labeled with `topology.kubernetes.io/zone=V`, the scheduler can
+assign the Pod to any node within Zone V, as long as there is at least one Pod within
+Zone V already labeled with `security=S1`. Conversely, if there are no Pods with `security=S1`
 labels in Zone V, the scheduler will not assign the example Pod to any node in that zone.
 
-The anti-affinity rule specifies that the scheduler should try to avoid scheduling the Pod 
+The anti-affinity rule specifies that the scheduler should try to avoid scheduling the Pod
 on a node if that node belongs to a specific [zone](/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints/)
-where other Pods have been labeled with `security=S2`. 
-For instance, if we have a cluster with a designated zone, let's call it "Zone R," 
-consisting of nodes labeled with `topology.kubernetes.io/zone=R`, the scheduler should avoid 
-assigning the Pod to any node within Zone R, as long as there is at least one Pod within 
-Zone R already labeled with `security=S2`. Conversely, the anti-affinity rule does not impact 
+where other Pods have been labeled with `security=S2`.
+For instance, if we have a cluster with a designated zone, let's call it "Zone R,"
+consisting of nodes labeled with `topology.kubernetes.io/zone=R`, the scheduler should avoid
+assigning the Pod to any node within Zone R, as long as there is at least one Pod within
+Zone R already labeled with `security=S2`. Conversely, the anti-affinity rule does not impact
 scheduling into Zone R if there are no Pods with `security=S2` labels.
 
 To get yourself more familiar with the examples of Pod affinity and anti-affinity,
@@ -364,19 +364,19 @@ null `namespaceSelector` matches the namespace of the Pod where the rule is defi
 
 {{< note >}}
 <!-- UPDATE THIS WHEN PROMOTING TO BETA -->
-The `matchLabelKeys` field is a alpha-level field and is disabled by default in
+The `matchLabelKeys` field is an alpha-level field and is disabled by default in
 Kubernetes {{< skew currentVersion >}}.
 When you want to use it, you have to enable it via the
 `MatchLabelKeysInPodAffinity` [feature gate](/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates/).
 {{< /note >}}
 
 Kubernetes includes an optional `matchLabelKeys` field for Pod affinity
-or anti-affinity. The field specifies keys for the labels that should  match with the incoming Pod's labels, 
+or anti-affinity. The field specifies keys for the labels that should  match with the incoming Pod's labels,
 when satisfying the Pod (anti)affinity.
 
 The keys are used to look up values from the pod labels; those key-value labels are combined
 (using `AND`) with the match restrictions defined using the `labelSelector` field. The combined
-filtering selects the set of existing pods that will be taken into Pod (anti)affinity calculation. 
+filtering selects the set of existing pods that will be taken into Pod (anti)affinity calculation.
 
 A common use case is to use `matchLabelKeys` with `pod-template-hash` (set on Pods
 managed as part of a Deployment, where the value is unique for each revision).
@@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ spec:
             # Only Pods from a given rollout are taken into consideration when calculating pod affinity.
             # If you update the Deployment, the replacement Pods follow their own affinity rules
             # (if there are any defined in the new Pod template)
-            matchLabelKeys: 
+            matchLabelKeys:
             - pod-template-hash
 ```
 
@@ -415,14 +415,14 @@ spec:
 
 {{< note >}}
 <!-- UPDATE THIS WHEN PROMOTING TO BETA -->
-The `mismatchLabelKeys` field is a alpha-level field and is disabled by default in
+The `mismatchLabelKeys` field is an alpha-level field and is disabled by default in
 Kubernetes {{< skew currentVersion >}}.
 When you want to use it, you have to enable it via the
 `MatchLabelKeysInPodAffinity` [feature gate](/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates/).
 {{< /note >}}
 
 Kubernetes includes an optional `mismatchLabelKeys` field for Pod affinity
-or anti-affinity. The field specifies keys for the labels that should **not** match with the incoming Pod's labels, 
+or anti-affinity. The field specifies keys for the labels that should **not** match with the incoming Pod's labels,
 when satisfying the Pod (anti)affinity.
 
 One example use case is to ensure Pods go to the topology domain (node, zone, etc) where only Pods from the same tenant or team are scheduled in.
@@ -438,22 +438,22 @@ metadata:
 ...
 spec:
   affinity:
-    podAffinity:      
+    podAffinity:
       requiredDuringSchedulingIgnoredDuringExecution:
       # ensure that pods associated with this tenant land on the correct node pool
       - matchLabelKeys:
           - tenant
         topologyKey: node-pool
-    podAntiAffinity:  
+    podAntiAffinity:
       requiredDuringSchedulingIgnoredDuringExecution:
       # ensure that pods associated with this tenant can't schedule to nodes used for another tenant
       - mismatchLabelKeys:
-        - tenant # whatever the value of the "tenant" label for this Pod, prevent  
+        - tenant # whatever the value of the "tenant" label for this Pod, prevent
                  # scheduling to nodes in any pool where any Pod from a different
                  # tenant is running.
         labelSelector:
           # We have to have the labelSelector which selects only Pods with the tenant label,
-          # otherwise this Pod would hate Pods from daemonsets as well, for example, 
+          # otherwise this Pod would hate Pods from daemonsets as well, for example,
           # which aren't supposed to have the tenant label.
           matchExpressions:
           - key: tenant
@@ -561,7 +561,7 @@ where each web server is co-located with a cache, on three separate nodes.
 | *webserver-1* | *webserver-2* | *webserver-3* |
 |   *cache-1*   |   *cache-2*   |   *cache-3*   |
 
-The overall effect is that each cache instance is likely to be accessed by a single client, that
+The overall effect is that each cache instance is likely to be accessed by a single client that
 is running on the same node. This approach aims to minimize both skew (imbalanced load) and latency.
 
 You might have other reasons to use Pod anti-affinity.
@@ -589,7 +589,7 @@ Some of the limitations of using `nodeName` to select nodes are:
 {{< note >}}
 `nodeName` is intended for use by custom schedulers or advanced use cases where
 you need to bypass any configured schedulers. Bypassing the schedulers might lead to
-failed Pods if the assigned Nodes get oversubscribed. You can use [node affinity](#node-affinity) or a the [`nodeselector` field](#nodeselector) to assign a Pod to a specific Node without bypassing the schedulers.
+failed Pods if the assigned Nodes get oversubscribed. You can use the [node affinity](#node-affinity) or the [`nodeselector` field](#nodeselector) to assign a Pod to a specific Node without bypassing the schedulers.
 {{</ note >}}
 
 Here is an example of a Pod spec using the `nodeName` field:
@@ -633,13 +633,13 @@ The following operators can only be used with `nodeAffinity`.
 
 |    Operator    |    Behaviour    |
 | :------------: | :-------------: |
-| `Gt` | The supplied value will be parsed as an integer, and that integer is less than the integer that results from parsing the value of a label named by this selector | 
-| `Lt` | The supplied value will be parsed as an integer, and that integer is greater than the integer that results from parsing the value of a label named by this selector | 
+| `Gt` | The supplied value will be parsed as an integer, and that integer is less than the integer that results from parsing the value of a label named by this selector |
+| `Lt` | The supplied value will be parsed as an integer, and that integer is greater than the integer that results from parsing the value of a label named by this selector |
 
 
 {{<note>}}
-`Gt` and `Lt` operators will not work with non-integer values. If the given value 
-doesn't parse as an integer, the pod will fail to get scheduled. Also, `Gt` and `Lt` 
+`Gt` and `Lt` operators will not work with non-integer values. If the given value
+doesn't parse as an integer, the pod will fail to get scheduled. Also, `Gt` and `Lt`
 are not available for `podAffinity`.
 {{</note>}}
 

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/dynamic-resource-allocation.md

@@ -41,14 +41,14 @@ ResourceClass
   driver.
 
 ResourceClaim
-: Defines a particular resource instances that is required by a
+: Defines a particular resource instance that is required by a
   workload. Created by a user (lifecycle managed manually, can be shared
   between different Pods) or for individual Pods by the control plane based on
   a ResourceClaimTemplate (automatic lifecycle, typically used by just one
   Pod).
 
 ResourceClaimTemplate
-: Defines the spec and some meta data for creating
+: Defines the spec and some metadata for creating
   ResourceClaims. Created by a user when deploying a workload.
 
 PodSchedulingContext

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/kube-scheduler.md

@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ kube-scheduler selects a node for the pod in a 2-step operation:
 
 The _filtering_ step finds the set of Nodes where it's feasible to
 schedule the Pod. For example, the PodFitsResources filter checks whether a
-candidate Node has enough available resource to meet a Pod's specific
+candidate Node has enough available resources to meet a Pod's specific
 resource requests. After this step, the node list contains any suitable
 Nodes; often, there will be more than one. If the list is empty, that
 Pod isn't (yet) schedulable.

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/node-pressure-eviction.md

@@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ The kubelet has the following default hard eviction thresholds:
 - `nodefs.inodesFree<5%` (Linux nodes)
 
 These default values of hard eviction thresholds will only be set if none
-of the parameters is changed. If you changed the value of any parameter,
+of the parameters is changed. If you change the value of any parameter,
 then the values of other parameters will not be inherited as the default
 values and will be set to zero. In order to provide custom values, you
 should provide all the thresholds respectively.

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/pod-priority-preemption.md

@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ and it cannot be prefixed with `system-`.
 
 A PriorityClass object can have any 32-bit integer value smaller than or equal
 to 1 billion. This means that the range of values for a PriorityClass object is
-from -2147483648 to 1000000000 inclusive. Larger numbers are reserved for 
+from -2147483648 to 1000000000 inclusive. Larger numbers are reserved for
 built-in PriorityClasses that represent critical system Pods. A cluster
 admin should create one PriorityClass object for each such mapping that they want.
 
@@ -182,8 +182,8 @@ When Pod priority is enabled, the scheduler orders pending Pods by
 their priority and a pending Pod is placed ahead of other pending Pods
 with lower priority in the scheduling queue. As a result, the higher
 priority Pod may be scheduled sooner than Pods with lower priority if
-its scheduling requirements are met. If such Pod cannot be scheduled,
-scheduler will continue and tries to schedule other lower priority Pods.
+its scheduling requirements are met. If such Pod cannot be scheduled, the
+scheduler will continue and try to schedule other lower priority Pods.
 
 ## Preemption
 
@@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ the Pods are gone, P can be scheduled on the Node.
 ### User exposed information
 
 When Pod P preempts one or more Pods on Node N, `nominatedNodeName` field of Pod
-P's status is set to the name of Node N. This field helps scheduler track
+P's status is set to the name of Node N. This field helps the scheduler track
 resources reserved for Pod P and also gives users information about preemptions
 in their clusters.
 
@@ -209,8 +209,8 @@ After victim Pods are preempted, they get their graceful termination period. If
 another node becomes available while scheduler is waiting for the victim Pods to
 terminate, scheduler may use the other node to schedule Pod P. As a result
 `nominatedNodeName` and `nodeName` of Pod spec are not always the same. Also, if
-scheduler preempts Pods on Node N, but then a higher priority Pod than Pod P
-arrives, scheduler may give Node N to the new higher priority Pod. In such a
+the scheduler preempts Pods on Node N, but then a higher priority Pod than Pod P
+arrives, the scheduler may give Node N to the new higher priority Pod. In such a
 case, scheduler clears `nominatedNodeName` of Pod P. By doing this, scheduler
 makes Pod P eligible to preempt Pods on another Node.
 
@@ -256,9 +256,9 @@ the Node is not considered for preemption.
 
 If a pending Pod has inter-pod {{< glossary_tooltip text="affinity" term_id="affinity" >}}
 to one or more of the lower-priority Pods on the Node, the inter-Pod affinity
-rule cannot be satisfied in the absence of those lower-priority Pods. In this case, 
+rule cannot be satisfied in the absence of those lower-priority Pods. In this case,
 the scheduler does not preempt any Pods on the Node. Instead, it looks for another
-Node. The scheduler might find a suitable Node or it might not. There is no 
+Node. The scheduler might find a suitable Node or it might not. There is no
 guarantee that the pending Pod can be scheduled.
 
 Our recommended solution for this problem is to create inter-Pod affinity only
@@ -288,7 +288,7 @@ enough demand and if we find an algorithm with reasonable performance.
 
 ## Troubleshooting
 
-Pod priority and pre-emption can have unwanted side effects. Here are some
+Pod priority and preemption can have unwanted side effects. Here are some
 examples of potential problems and ways to deal with them.
 
 ### Pods are preempted unnecessarily
@@ -361,7 +361,7 @@ to get evicted. The kubelet ranks pods for eviction based on the following facto
 
   1. Whether the starved resource usage exceeds requests
   1. Pod Priority
-  1. Amount of resource usage relative to requests 
+  1. Amount of resource usage relative to requests
 
 See [Pod selection for kubelet eviction](/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/node-pressure-eviction/#pod-selection-for-kubelet-eviction)
 for more details.