2023-09-13 13:17:48

by Colin Ian King

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] bcachefs: Fix a handful of spelling mistakes in various messages

On 12/09/2023 14:51, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:25:27AM +0100, Colin Ian King wrote:
>> There are several spelling mistakes in error messages. Fix these.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> fs/bcachefs/alloc_background.c | 2 +-
>> fs/bcachefs/backpointers.c | 2 +-
>> fs/bcachefs/btree_iter.c | 2 +-
>> fs/bcachefs/fsck.c | 2 +-
>> fs/bcachefs/recovery.c | 2 +-
>> fs/bcachefs/snapshot.c | 2 +-
>> fs/bcachefs/super-io.c | 2 +-
>> 7 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/alloc_background.c b/fs/bcachefs/alloc_background.c
>> index 540d94c0cceb..dd9f3cbace1e 100644
>> --- a/fs/bcachefs/alloc_background.c
>> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/alloc_background.c
>> @@ -1247,7 +1247,7 @@ static noinline_for_stack int __bch2_check_discard_freespace_key(struct btree_tr
>> return ret;
>>
>> if (fsck_err_on(!bch2_dev_bucket_exists(c, pos), c,
>> - "entry in %s btree for nonexistant dev:bucket %llu:%llu",
>> + "entry in %s btree for non-existent dev:bucket %llu:%llu",
>
> "nonexistent" doesn't necessarily need to be hyphenated, right?

either way is valid, but some folk prefer the hyphenated version as it's
apparently easier to scan.

>
> Not that I really care ;), just curious. I'm sure Kent can massage or
> not if desired:
>
> Reviewed-by: Brian Foster <[email protected]>
>
>> bch2_btree_ids[iter->btree_id], pos.inode, pos.offset))
>> goto delete;
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/backpointers.c b/fs/bcachefs/backpointers.c
>> index 8747c5e19f99..bec62e5b21e5 100644
>> --- a/fs/bcachefs/backpointers.c
>> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/backpointers.c
>> @@ -357,7 +357,7 @@ static int bch2_check_btree_backpointer(struct btree_trans *trans, struct btree_
>> int ret = 0;
>>
>> if (fsck_err_on(!bch2_dev_exists2(c, k.k->p.inode), c,
>> - "backpointer for mising device:\n%s",
>> + "backpointer for missing device:\n%s",
>> (bch2_bkey_val_to_text(&buf, c, k), buf.buf))) {
>> ret = bch2_btree_delete_at(trans, bp_iter, 0);
>> goto out;
>> diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/btree_iter.c b/fs/bcachefs/btree_iter.c
>> index 1dbb4d7dfb45..8d089bbdb1e5 100644
>> --- a/fs/bcachefs/btree_iter.c
>> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/btree_iter.c
>> @@ -1495,7 +1495,7 @@ static void bch2_trans_update_max_paths(struct btree_trans *trans)
>> static noinline void btree_path_overflow(struct btree_trans *trans)
>> {
>> bch2_dump_trans_paths_updates(trans);
>> - panic("trans path oveflow\n");
>> + panic("trans path overflow\n");
>> }
>>
>> static inline struct btree_path *btree_path_alloc(struct btree_trans *trans,
>> diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/fsck.c b/fs/bcachefs/fsck.c
>> index 238caeeaf06c..cc04d5a22f40 100644
>> --- a/fs/bcachefs/fsck.c
>> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/fsck.c
>> @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ static int __snapshot_lookup_subvol(struct btree_trans *trans, u32 snapshot,
>> if (!ret)
>> *subvol = le32_to_cpu(s.subvol);
>> else if (bch2_err_matches(ret, ENOENT))
>> - bch_err(trans->c, "snapshot %u not fonud", snapshot);
>> + bch_err(trans->c, "snapshot %u not found", snapshot);
>> return ret;
>>
>> }
>> diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/recovery.c b/fs/bcachefs/recovery.c
>> index 30efb3c90560..a78f5d023ef2 100644
>> --- a/fs/bcachefs/recovery.c
>> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/recovery.c
>> @@ -561,7 +561,7 @@ static void check_version_upgrade(struct bch_fs *c)
>> if ((recovery_passes & RECOVERY_PASS_ALL_FSCK) == RECOVERY_PASS_ALL_FSCK)
>> prt_str(&buf, "fsck required");
>> else {
>> - prt_str(&buf, "running recovery passses: ");
>> + prt_str(&buf, "running recovery passes: ");
>> prt_bitflags(&buf, bch2_recovery_passes, recovery_passes);
>> }
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/snapshot.c b/fs/bcachefs/snapshot.c
>> index 9da09911466e..c2af574acb7c 100644
>> --- a/fs/bcachefs/snapshot.c
>> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/snapshot.c
>> @@ -1385,7 +1385,7 @@ int bch2_delete_dead_snapshots(struct bch_fs *c)
>> if (!test_bit(BCH_FS_STARTED, &c->flags)) {
>> ret = bch2_fs_read_write_early(c);
>> if (ret) {
>> - bch_err(c, "error deleleting dead snapshots: error going rw: %s", bch2_err_str(ret));
>> + bch_err(c, "error deleting dead snapshots: error going rw: %s", bch2_err_str(ret));
>> return ret;
>> }
>> }
>> diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/super-io.c b/fs/bcachefs/super-io.c
>> index f01883e785a5..6efd279655ae 100644
>> --- a/fs/bcachefs/super-io.c
>> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/super-io.c
>> @@ -385,7 +385,7 @@ static int bch2_sb_validate(struct bch_sb_handle *disk_sb, struct printbuf *out,
>> }
>>
>> if (bch2_is_zero(sb->uuid.b, sizeof(sb->uuid))) {
>> - prt_printf(out, "Bad intenal UUID (got zeroes)");
>> + prt_printf(out, "Bad internal UUID (got zeroes)");
>> return -BCH_ERR_invalid_sb_uuid;
>> }
>>
>> --
>> 2.39.2
>>
>


2023-09-16 10:24:06

by Kent Overstreet

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] bcachefs: Fix a handful of spelling mistakes in various messages

On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 04:00:23PM +0100, Colin King (gmail) wrote:
> On 12/09/2023 14:51, Brian Foster wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:25:27AM +0100, Colin Ian King wrote:
> > > There are several spelling mistakes in error messages. Fix these.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > fs/bcachefs/alloc_background.c | 2 +-
> > > fs/bcachefs/backpointers.c | 2 +-
> > > fs/bcachefs/btree_iter.c | 2 +-
> > > fs/bcachefs/fsck.c | 2 +-
> > > fs/bcachefs/recovery.c | 2 +-
> > > fs/bcachefs/snapshot.c | 2 +-
> > > fs/bcachefs/super-io.c | 2 +-
> > > 7 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/alloc_background.c b/fs/bcachefs/alloc_background.c
> > > index 540d94c0cceb..dd9f3cbace1e 100644
> > > --- a/fs/bcachefs/alloc_background.c
> > > +++ b/fs/bcachefs/alloc_background.c
> > > @@ -1247,7 +1247,7 @@ static noinline_for_stack int __bch2_check_discard_freespace_key(struct btree_tr
> > > return ret;
> > > if (fsck_err_on(!bch2_dev_bucket_exists(c, pos), c,
> > > - "entry in %s btree for nonexistant dev:bucket %llu:%llu",
> > > + "entry in %s btree for non-existent dev:bucket %llu:%llu",
> >
> > "nonexistent" doesn't necessarily need to be hyphenated, right?
>
> either way is valid, but some folk prefer the hyphenated version as it's
> apparently easier to scan.

Let's stick with the non hyphenated.