Comment spelling fix: tunning -> tuning

Kyrylo noticed another spelling bug and like usually, the same mistake
happens in multiple places.

2025-07-10  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>

	* config/i386/x86-tune.def: Change "Tunning the" to "tuning" in
	comment and use semicolon instead of dot in comment.
	* loop-unroll.cc (decide_unroll_stupid): Comment spelling fix,
	tunning -> tuning.

diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/x86-tune.def b/gcc/config/i386/x86-tune.def
index a039db3cfcedab3c1371071a2c8b869fb91ac742..a86cbad281c13e503fe9588ad17d8b872f78edb9 100644 (file)
--- a/gcc/config/i386/x86-tune.def
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/x86-tune.def
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ see the files COPYING3 and COPYING.RUNTIME respectively.  If not, see
        - Updating ix86_issue_rate and ix86_adjust_cost in i386.md
        - possibly updating ia32_multipass_dfa_lookahead, ix86_sched_reorder
          and ix86_sched_init_global if those tricks are needed.
-    - Tunning the flags below. Those are split into sections and each
+    - tuning flags below; those are split into sections and each
       section is very roughly ordered by importance.  */
 
 /*****************************************************************************/

diff --git a/gcc/loop-unroll.cc b/gcc/loop-unroll.cc
index 6149cecb28de9405c1b09459d1f05dff5a5d0476..c80a6cb6cd0cbd6fe06f12dd13d9b431f43a42f4 100644 (file)
--- a/gcc/loop-unroll.cc
+++ b/gcc/loop-unroll.cc
@@ -1185,7 +1185,7 @@ decide_unroll_stupid (class loop *loop, int flags)
 
   /* Do not unroll loops with branches inside -- it increases number
      of mispredicts.
-     TODO: this heuristic needs tunning; call inside the loop body
+     TODO: this heuristic needs tuning; call inside the loop body
      is also relatively good reason to not unroll.  */
   if (num_loop_branches (loop) > 1)
     {