[PATCH] powerpc: Fix typos and field name in comments

[Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho]

Hi Gustavo,

The patch looks mostly good to me except for one line where I have a question.
I plan to push it after getting a confirmation from you.

Gustavo Romero <gromero@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:

> Fix a couple of typos and v_regs field name in mcontext_t.


> diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog
> index 225da01..39f50b8 100644
> --- a/ChangeLog
> +++ b/ChangeLog
> @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
> +2019-08-12  Gustavo Romero  <gromero@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> +
> +	* sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/sys/ucontext.h: Fix typos and
> +	field name in mcontext_t struct.
> +

Remember to put the ChangeLog in the commit message for you next patch.  ;-)
For more information:
https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Contribution%20checklist#Properly_Formatted_GNU_ChangeLog

> diff --git a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/sys/ucontext.h b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/sys/ucontext.h
> index 640381a..6093ade 100644
> --- a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/sys/ucontext.h
> +++ b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/sys/ucontext.h
> @@ -75,12 +75,12 @@ typedef struct
>   * a sigcontext.  For older kernel (without Altivec) the sigcontext matches
>   * the mcontext upto but not including the v_regs field.  For kernels that
>   * don't set AT_HWCAP or return AT_HWCAP without PPC_FEATURE_HAS_ALTIVEC the
> - * v_regs field may not exist and should not be referenced.  The v_regd field
> - * can be refernced safely only after verifying that PPC_FEATURE_HAS_ALTIVEC
> + * v_regs field may not exist and should not be referenced.  The v_regs field
> + * can be referenced safely only after verifying that PPC_FEATURE_HAS_ALTIVEC

OK.

>  
>  /* Number of general registers.  */
> -# define __NGREG	48	/* includes r0-r31, nip, msr, lr, etc.   */
> +# define __NGREG	48	/* includes r0-r31, nip, msr, lr, etc.  */

I'm afraid this modification should not be here.
Or am I missing a fix here?

> @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ typedef struct {
>   * either NULL (if this processor does not support the VMX feature) or the
>   * address of the first quadword within the allocated (vmx_reserve) area.
>   *
> - * The pointer (v_regs) of vector type (elf_vrreg_t) is essentually
> + * The pointer (v_regs) of vector type (elf_vrreg_t) is essentially

OK.

Thanks,

-- 
Tulio Magno