[PATCH][next] KVM: selftests: Fix spelling mistake "probabalistic" -> "probabilistic"

[PATCH][next] KVM: selftests: Fix spelling mistake "probabalistic" -> "probabilistic"

[Colin Ian King]

There is a spelling mistake in some help text. Fix it.

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_perf_test.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_perf_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_perf_test.c
index c33e89012ae6..e9d6d1aecf89 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_perf_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_perf_test.c
@@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ static void help(char *name)
 	printf(" -x: Split the memory region into this number of memslots.\n"
 	       "     (default: 1)\n");
 	printf(" -w: specify the percentage of pages which should be written to\n"
-	       "     as an integer from 0-100 inclusive. This is probabalistic,\n"
+	       "     as an integer from 0-100 inclusive. This is probabilistic,\n"
 	       "     so -w X means each page has an X%% chance of writing\n"
 	       "     and a (100-X)%% chance of reading.\n"
 	       "     (default: 100 i.e. all pages are written to.)\n");
-- 
2.38.1

Re: [PATCH][next] KVM: selftests: Fix spelling mistake "probabalistic" -> "probabilistic"

[Sean Christopherson]

On Thu, Dec 01, 2022, Colin Ian King wrote:
> There is a spelling mistake in some help text. Fix it.

I assume you have a script/tool of some form to do spell checking?  If so, can
you point me at it?  I'd love to incorporate something like that into my workflow.

Thanks!

> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>

Re: [PATCH][next] KVM: selftests: Fix spelling mistake "probabalistic" -> "probabilistic"

[Colin King (gmail)]

On 02/12/2022 17:21, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2022, Colin Ian King wrote:
>> There is a spelling mistake in some help text. Fix it.
> 
> I assume you have a script/tool of some form to do spell checking?  If so, can
> you point me at it?  I'd love to incorporate something like that into my workflow.

https://github.com/ColinIanKing/kernelscan

It needs an appropriate dictionary to be installed. It's very fast (but 
sometimes makes mistakes, I need to fix those!).

./kernelscan -k src_directory > mistakes.txt

I normally run this across the entire kernel git repo on a daily basis, 
and diff the new results with the previous results using meld and figure 
out what needs to be fixed.

You may be better off with using codespell

Colin

> 
> Thanks!
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>
>> ---
> 
> Reviewed-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>

Re: [PATCH][next] KVM: selftests: Fix spelling mistake "probabalistic" -> "probabilistic"

[Sean Christopherson]

On Fri, Dec 02, 2022, Colin King (gmail) wrote:
> On 02/12/2022 17:21, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 01, 2022, Colin Ian King wrote:
> > > There is a spelling mistake in some help text. Fix it.
> > 
> > I assume you have a script/tool of some form to do spell checking?  If so, can
> > you point me at it?  I'd love to incorporate something like that into my workflow.
> 
> https://github.com/ColinIanKing/kernelscan
> 
> It needs an appropriate dictionary to be installed. It's very fast (but
> sometimes makes mistakes, I need to fix those!).
> 
> ./kernelscan -k src_directory > mistakes.txt

Ah, it's specifically checking messages to avoid false postives on code and whatnot.
Neat!

> I normally run this across the entire kernel git repo on a daily basis, and
> diff the new results with the previous results using meld and figure out
> what needs to be fixed.
> 
> You may be better off with using codespell

Heh, my kind of nitpicking people :-)

  MSDOS->MS-DOS

Thanks a ton, that's exactly what I was looking for!

Re: [PATCH][next] KVM: selftests: Fix spelling mistake "probabalistic" -> "probabilistic"

[Sean Christopherson]

On Fri, Dec 02, 2022, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2022, Colin King (gmail) wrote:
> > You may be better off with using codespell
> 
> Heh, my kind of nitpicking people :-)
> 
>   MSDOS->MS-DOS
> 
> Thanks a ton, that's exactly what I was looking for!

For anyone following along and/or laughing at me, checkpatch even supports using
codespell, e.g.

  ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -g HEAD --codespell

Re: [PATCH][next] KVM: selftests: Fix spelling mistake "probabalistic" -> "probabilistic"

[Colin King (gmail)]

On 02/12/2022 18:57, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2022, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 02, 2022, Colin King (gmail) wrote:
>>> You may be better off with using codespell
>>
>> Heh, my kind of nitpicking people :-)
>>
>>    MSDOS->MS-DOS
>>
>> Thanks a ton, that's exactly what I was looking for!
> 
> For anyone following along and/or laughing at me, checkpatch even supports using
> codespell, e.g.
> 
>    ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -g HEAD --codespell

checkpatch also uses a misspelling dictionary that I occasionally 
contribute to with common spelling mistakes that I find and fix.

Colin

Re: [PATCH][next] KVM: selftests: Fix spelling mistake "probabalistic" -> "probabilistic"

[Paolo Bonzini]

On 12/1/22 10:13, Colin Ian King wrote:
> There is a spelling mistake in some help text. Fix it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>
> ---
>   tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_perf_test.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_perf_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_perf_test.c
> index c33e89012ae6..e9d6d1aecf89 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_perf_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_perf_test.c
> @@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ static void help(char *name)
>   	printf(" -x: Split the memory region into this number of memslots.\n"
>   	       "     (default: 1)\n");
>   	printf(" -w: specify the percentage of pages which should be written to\n"
> -	       "     as an integer from 0-100 inclusive. This is probabalistic,\n"
> +	       "     as an integer from 0-100 inclusive. This is probabilistic,\n"
>   	       "     so -w X means each page has an X%% chance of writing\n"
>   	       "     and a (100-X)%% chance of reading.\n"
>   	       "     (default: 100 i.e. all pages are written to.)\n");

Queued, thanks.

Paolo