Hi Quentin, On mar., juin 04, 2024 at 11:47, Quentin Schulz <quentin.sch...@cherry.de> wrote:
> Hi Mattijs, > > On 6/3/24 11:11 AM, Mattijs Korpershoek wrote: >> Fix some trivial typos found by browsing the code. >> Done with flyspell. >> >> Signed-off-by: Mattijs Korpershoek <mkorpersh...@baylibre.com> > --- >> include/bootmeth.h | 12 ++++++------ >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/include/bootmeth.h b/include/bootmeth.h >> index 0fc36104ece0..529c4d813d82 100644 >> --- a/include/bootmeth.h >> +++ b/include/bootmeth.h >> @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ struct bootmeth_ops { >> /** >> * get_state_desc() - get detailed state information >> * >> - * Prodecues a textual description of the state of the bootmeth. This >> + * Produces a textual description of the state of the bootmeth. This >> * can include newline characters if it extends to multiple lines. It >> * must be a nul-terminated string. >> * >> @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ struct bootmeth_ops { >> * @dev: Bootmethod device to boot >> * @bflow: Bootflow to boot >> * Return: does not return on success, since it should boot the >> - * Operating Systemn. Returns -EFAULT if that fails, -ENOTSUPP if >> + * Operating System. Returns -EFAULT if that fails, -ENOTSUPP if >> * trying method resulted in finding out that is not actually >> * supported for this boot and should not be tried again unless >> * something changes, other -ve on other error >> @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ struct bootmeth_ops { >> /** >> * bootmeth_get_state_desc() - get detailed state information >> * >> - * Prodecues a textual description of the state of the bootmeth. This >> + * Produces a textual description of the state of the bootmeth. This >> * can include newline characters if it extends to multiple lines. It >> * must be a nul-terminated string. > > I see we have a mix of null-terminated and nul-terminated in the tree, > is the latter correct? Thank you for your review. I believe nul-terminated is correct: nul is the character, and null is the pointer. See: - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22283217 - https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/null-consistency/16767 I'll check the tree and submit another patch to fix this. > >> * >> @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ int bootmeth_read_file(struct udevice *dev, struct >> bootflow *bflow, >> * @dev: Bootmethod device to use >> * @bflow: Bootflow to read >> * Return: does not return on success, since it should boot the >> - * Operating Systemn. Returns -EFAULT if that fails, other -ve on >> + * Operating System. Returns -EFAULT if that fails, other -ve on >> * other error >> */ >> int bootmeth_read_all(struct udevice *dev, struct bootflow *bflow); >> @@ -255,7 +255,7 @@ int bootmeth_read_all(struct udevice *dev, struct >> bootflow *bflow); >> * @dev: Bootmethod device to boot >> * @bflow: Bootflow to boot >> * Return: does not return on success, since it should boot the >> - * Operating Systemn. Returns -EFAULT if that fails, other -ve on >> + * Operating System. Returns -EFAULT if that fails, other -ve on >> * other error >> */ >> int bootmeth_boot(struct udevice *dev, struct bootflow *bflow); >> @@ -264,7 +264,7 @@ int bootmeth_boot(struct udevice *dev, struct bootflow >> *bflow); >> * bootmeth_setup_iter_order() - Set up the ordering of bootmeths to scan >> * >> * This sets up the ordering information in @iter, based on the selected >> - * ordering of the bootmethds in bootstd_priv->bootmeth_order. If there is >> no >> + * ordering of the bootmeths in bootstd_priv->bootmeth_order. If there is no >> * ordering there, then all bootmethods are added >> * > > Shouldn't this be bootmeths here as well? > > (And there's another occurrence in boot/bootmeth-uclass.c There seems indeed to be some inconsistencies around bootmeths versus bootmethods. To me, we should use 'bootmeth' everywhere. Simon, as the maintainer of bootflow, do you agree ? I can spin up another patch to fix this. > > Cheers, > Quentin