Re: [PATCH] vhost-user: ancilliary -> ancillary

[Gustavo Romero <gustavo.romero@linaro.org>]

Hi Michael,

On 11/17/25 08:55, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> My dictionary says the former spelling is incorrect.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> ---
>   docs/interop/vhost-user.rst | 4 ++--
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/docs/interop/vhost-user.rst b/docs/interop/vhost-user.rst
> index 93a9c8df2b..93f756d3f4 100644
> --- a/docs/interop/vhost-user.rst
> +++ b/docs/interop/vhost-user.rst
> @@ -411,8 +411,8 @@ in the ancillary data:
>   * ``VHOST_USER_SET_INFLIGHT_FD`` (if ``VHOST_USER_PROTOCOL_F_INFLIGHT_SHMFD``)
>   * ``VHOST_USER_SET_DEVICE_STATE_FD``
>   
> -When sending file descriptors in ancilliary data, *front-end* should
> -associate the ancilliary data with a ``sendmsg`` operation (or
> +When sending file descriptors in ancillary data, *front-end* should
> +associate the ancillary data with a ``sendmsg`` operation (or
>   equivalent) that sends bytes starting with the first byte of the
>   message header.  *back-end* can therefore expect that file descriptors
>   will only be received in the first ``recvmsg`` operation for a message

Yeah, I'm not a native English speaker but in my mind the latter is the correct form :)

Reviewed-by: Gustavo Romero <gustavo.romero@linaro.org>