RE: [PATCH bpf-next] Documentation: Fix spelling mistake.

[Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@googlemail.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eslam Khafagy <eslam.medhat1993@gmail.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 6, 2025 3:05 AM
> To: void@manifault.com; ast@kernel.org
> Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org; skhan@linuxfoundation.org;
bpf@vger.kernel.org;
> Eslam Khafagy <eslam.medhat1993@gmail.com>
> Subject: [PATCH bpf-next] Documentation: Fix spelling mistake.
> 
> Fix typo "desination => destination"
> in file
> Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eslam Khafagy <eslam.medhat1993@gmail.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
> b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
> index fbe975585236..ac950a5bb6ad 100644
> --- a/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
> @@ -350,9 +350,9 @@ Underflow and overflow are allowed during arithmetic
> operations, meaning  the 64-bit or 32-bit value will wrap. If BPF program
execution
> would  result in division by zero, the destination register is instead set
to zero.
>  Otherwise, for ``ALU64``, if execution would result in ``LLONG_MIN``
-dividing -1,
> the desination register is instead set to ``LLONG_MIN``. For
> +dividing -1, the destination register is instead set to ``LLONG_MIN``.
> +For
>  ``ALU``, if execution would result in ``INT_MIN`` dividing -1, the
-desination register
> is instead set to ``INT_MIN``.
> +destination register is instead set to ``INT_MIN``.
> 
>  If execution would result in modulo by zero, for ``ALU64`` the value of
the
> destination register is unchanged whereas for ``ALU`` the upper
> --
> 2.43.0

For just the spelling correction:
Acked-by: Dave Thaler <dthaler1968@gmail.com>

However the phrase "dividing -1" is one I find confusing.  E.g.,
"INT_MIN dividing -1" sounds like "-1 / INT_MIN" rather than the inverse.
Perhaps "divided by" instead of "dividing" assuming the inverse is meant.

Dave