linux-kernel - [PATCH] bpf: fix various typos in verifier.c comments

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250727081754.15986-1-suchitkarunakaran@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2025 13:47:54 +0530
From: Suchit Karunakaran <suchitkarunakaran@...il.com>
To: ast@...nel.org,
	daniel@...earbox.net,
	john.fastabend@...il.com,
	andrii@...nel.org,
	martin.lau@...ux.dev,
	eddyz87@...il.com,
	song@...nel.org,
	yonghong.song@...ux.dev,
	kpsingh@...nel.org,
	sdf@...ichev.me,
	haoluo@...gle.com,
	jolsa@...nel.org,
	bpf@...r.kernel.org
Cc: skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
	linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Suchit Karunakaran <suchitkarunakaran@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH] bpf: fix various typos in verifier.c comments

This patch fixes several minor typos in comments within the BPF verifier.
No changes in functionality.

Signed-off-by: Suchit Karunakaran <suchitkarunakaran@...il.com>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index e2fcea860755..4f13cce28815 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -4518,7 +4518,7 @@ static int backtrack_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int idx, int subseq_idx,
  *   . if (scalar cond K|scalar)
  *   .  helper_call(.., scalar, ...) where ARG_CONST is expected
  *   backtrack through the verifier states and mark all registers and
- *   stack slots with spilled constants that these scalar regisers
+ *   stack slots with spilled constants that these scalar registers
  *   should be precise.
  * . during state pruning two registers (or spilled stack slots)
  *   are equivalent if both are not precise.
@@ -18450,7 +18450,7 @@ static void clean_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 /* the parentage chains form a tree.
  * the verifier states are added to state lists at given insn and
  * pushed into state stack for future exploration.
- * when the verifier reaches bpf_exit insn some of the verifer states
+ * when the verifier reaches bpf_exit insn some of the verifier states
  * stored in the state lists have their final liveness state already,
  * but a lot of states will get revised from liveness point of view when
  * the verifier explores other branches.
@@ -19166,7 +19166,7 @@ static bool is_iter_next_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx)
  * terminology) calls specially: as opposed to bounded BPF loops, it *expects*
  * states to match, which otherwise would look like an infinite loop. So while
  * iter_next() calls are taken care of, we still need to be careful and
- * prevent erroneous and too eager declaration of "ininite loop", when
+ * prevent erroneous and too eager declaration of "infinite loop", when
  * iterators are involved.
  *
  * Here's a situation in pseudo-BPF assembly form:
@@ -19208,7 +19208,7 @@ static bool is_iter_next_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx)
  *
  * This approach allows to keep infinite loop heuristic even in the face of
  * active iterator. E.g., C snippet below is and will be detected as
- * inifintely looping:
+ * infinitely looping:
  *
  *   struct bpf_iter_num it;
  *   int *p, x;
@@ -24449,7 +24449,7 @@ static int compute_scc(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 	 *        if pre[i] == 0:
 	 *            recur(i)
 	 *
-	 * Below implementation replaces explicit recusion with array 'dfs'.
+	 * Below implementation replaces explicit recursion with array 'dfs'.
 	 */
 	for (i = 0; i < insn_cnt; i++) {
 		if (pre[i])
-- 
2.50.1