bpf, scripts: Correct GPL license name

[ Upstream commit e37243b65d528a8a9f8b9a57a43885f8e8dfc15c ]

The bpf_doc script refers to the GPL as the "GNU Privacy License".
I strongly suspect that the author wanted to refer to the GNU General
Public License, under which the Linux kernel is released, as, to the
best of my knowledge, there is no license named "GNU Privacy License".
This patch corrects the license name in the script accordingly.

Fixes: 56a092c89505 ("bpf: add script and prepare bpf.h for new helpers documentation")
Signed-off-by: Gianmarco Lusvardi <glusvardi@posteo.net>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240213230544.930018-3-glusvardi@posteo.net
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

diff --git a/scripts/bpf_doc.py b/scripts/bpf_doc.py
index 00ac7b79cddb47c11a23117692ad48d53ae90d40..7772c6424089eee2f995b6b65fe1452ac85e5742 100755 (executable)
--- a/scripts/bpf_doc.py
+++ b/scripts/bpf_doc.py
@@ -369,7 +369,7 @@ eBPF programs can have an associated license, passed along with the bytecode
 instructions to the kernel when the programs are loaded. The format for that
 string is identical to the one in use for kernel modules (Dual licenses, such
 as "Dual BSD/GPL", may be used). Some helper functions are only accessible to
-programs that are compatible with the GNU Privacy License (GPL).
+programs that are compatible with the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL).
 
 In order to use such helpers, the eBPF program must be loaded with the correct
 license string passed (via **attr**) to the **bpf**\ () system call, and this