libbpf: Fix a couple of typos

This change fixes a couple of typos that were encountered while studying
the source code.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Müller <deso@posteo.net>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220601154025.3295035-1-deso@posteo.net
This commit is contained in:
Daniel Müller
2022-06-01 15:40:25 +00:00
committed by Andrii Nakryiko
parent a5d75daa8c
commit 55638904af
3 changed files with 6 additions and 6 deletions

View File

@@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ static bool core_relo_is_enumval_based(enum bpf_core_relo_kind kind)
* just a parsed access string representation): [0, 1, 2, 3].
*
* High-level spec will capture only 3 points:
* - intial zero-index access by pointer (&s->... is the same as &s[0]...);
* - initial zero-index access by pointer (&s->... is the same as &s[0]...);
* - field 'a' access (corresponds to '2' in low-level spec);
* - array element #3 access (corresponds to '3' in low-level spec).
*
@@ -1148,11 +1148,11 @@ int bpf_core_format_spec(char *buf, size_t buf_sz, const struct bpf_core_spec *s
* 3. It is supported and expected that there might be multiple flavors
* matching the spec. As long as all the specs resolve to the same set of
* offsets across all candidates, there is no error. If there is any
* ambiguity, CO-RE relocation will fail. This is necessary to accomodate
* imprefection of BTF deduplication, which can cause slight duplication of
* ambiguity, CO-RE relocation will fail. This is necessary to accommodate
* imperfection of BTF deduplication, which can cause slight duplication of
* the same BTF type, if some directly or indirectly referenced (by
* pointer) type gets resolved to different actual types in different
* object files. If such situation occurs, deduplicated BTF will end up
* object files. If such a situation occurs, deduplicated BTF will end up
* with two (or more) structurally identical types, which differ only in
* types they refer to through pointer. This should be OK in most cases and
* is not an error.