Fix spelling mistake in scheduling section

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/assign-pod-node.md

@@ -254,13 +254,13 @@ the node label that the system uses to denote the domain. For examples, see
 [Well-Known Labels, Annotations and Taints](/docs/reference/labels-annotations-taints/).
 
 {{< note >}}
-Inter-pod affinity and anti-affinity require substantial amount of
+Inter-pod affinity and anti-affinity require substantial amounts of
 processing which can slow down scheduling in large clusters significantly. We do
 not recommend using them in clusters larger than several hundred nodes.
 {{< /note >}}
 
 {{< note >}}
-Pod anti-affinity requires nodes to be consistently labelled, in other words,
+Pod anti-affinity requires nodes to be consistently labeled, in other words,
 every node in the cluster must have an appropriate label matching `topologyKey`.
 If some or all nodes are missing the specified `topologyKey` label, it can lead
 to unintended behavior.
@@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ null `namespaceSelector` matches the namespace of the Pod where the rule is defi
 
 {{< note >}}
 <!-- UPDATE THIS WHEN PROMOTING TO BETA -->
-The `matchLabelKeys` field is a alpha-level field and is disabled by default in
+The `matchLabelKeys` field is an alpha-level field and is disabled by default in
 Kubernetes {{< skew currentVersion >}}.
 When you want to use it, you have to enable it via the
 `MatchLabelKeysInPodAffinity` [feature gate](/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates/).
@@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ spec:
 
 {{< note >}}
 <!-- UPDATE THIS WHEN PROMOTING TO BETA -->
-The `mismatchLabelKeys` field is a alpha-level field and is disabled by default in
+The `mismatchLabelKeys` field is an alpha-level field and is disabled by default in
 Kubernetes {{< skew currentVersion >}}.
 When you want to use it, you have to enable it via the
 `MatchLabelKeysInPodAffinity` [feature gate](/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates/).
@@ -561,7 +561,7 @@ where each web server is co-located with a cache, on three separate nodes.
 | *webserver-1* | *webserver-2* | *webserver-3* |
 |   *cache-1*   |   *cache-2*   |   *cache-3*   |
 
-The overall effect is that each cache instance is likely to be accessed by a single client, that
+The overall effect is that each cache instance is likely to be accessed by a single client that
 is running on the same node. This approach aims to minimize both skew (imbalanced load) and latency.
 
 You might have other reasons to use Pod anti-affinity.
@@ -589,7 +589,7 @@ Some of the limitations of using `nodeName` to select nodes are:
 {{< note >}}
 `nodeName` is intended for use by custom schedulers or advanced use cases where
 you need to bypass any configured schedulers. Bypassing the schedulers might lead to
-failed Pods if the assigned Nodes get oversubscribed. You can use [node affinity](#node-affinity) or a the [`nodeselector` field](#nodeselector) to assign a Pod to a specific Node without bypassing the schedulers.
+failed Pods if the assigned Nodes get oversubscribed. You can use the [node affinity](#node-affinity) or the [`nodeselector` field](#nodeselector) to assign a Pod to a specific Node without bypassing the schedulers.
 {{</ note >}}
 
 Here is an example of a Pod spec using the `nodeName` field:

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/dynamic-resource-allocation.md

@@ -41,14 +41,14 @@ ResourceClass
   driver.
 
 ResourceClaim
-: Defines a particular resource instances that is required by a
+: Defines a particular resource instance that is required by a
   workload. Created by a user (lifecycle managed manually, can be shared
   between different Pods) or for individual Pods by the control plane based on
   a ResourceClaimTemplate (automatic lifecycle, typically used by just one
   Pod).
 
 ResourceClaimTemplate
-: Defines the spec and some meta data for creating
+: Defines the spec and some metadata for creating
   ResourceClaims. Created by a user when deploying a workload.
 
 PodSchedulingContext

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/node-pressure-eviction.md

@@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ The kubelet has the following default hard eviction thresholds:
 - `nodefs.inodesFree<5%` (Linux nodes)
 
 These default values of hard eviction thresholds will only be set if none
-of the parameters is changed. If you changed the value of any parameter,
+of the parameters is changed. If you change the value of any parameter,
 then the values of other parameters will not be inherited as the default
 values and will be set to zero. In order to provide custom values, you
 should provide all the thresholds respectively.

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/pod-priority-preemption.md

@@ -182,8 +182,8 @@ When Pod priority is enabled, the scheduler orders pending Pods by
 their priority and a pending Pod is placed ahead of other pending Pods
 with lower priority in the scheduling queue. As a result, the higher
 priority Pod may be scheduled sooner than Pods with lower priority if
-its scheduling requirements are met. If such Pod cannot be scheduled,
-scheduler will continue and tries to schedule other lower priority Pods.
+its scheduling requirements are met. If such Pod cannot be scheduled, the
+scheduler will continue and try to schedule other lower priority Pods.
 
 ## Preemption
 
@@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ the Pods are gone, P can be scheduled on the Node.
 ### User exposed information
 
 When Pod P preempts one or more Pods on Node N, `nominatedNodeName` field of Pod
-P's status is set to the name of Node N. This field helps scheduler track
+P's status is set to the name of Node N. This field helps the scheduler track
 resources reserved for Pod P and also gives users information about preemptions
 in their clusters.
 
@@ -209,8 +209,8 @@ After victim Pods are preempted, they get their graceful termination period. If
 another node becomes available while scheduler is waiting for the victim Pods to
 terminate, scheduler may use the other node to schedule Pod P. As a result
 `nominatedNodeName` and `nodeName` of Pod spec are not always the same. Also, if
-scheduler preempts Pods on Node N, but then a higher priority Pod than Pod P
-arrives, scheduler may give Node N to the new higher priority Pod. In such a
+the scheduler preempts Pods on Node N, but then a higher priority Pod than Pod P
+arrives, the scheduler may give Node N to the new higher priority Pod. In such a
 case, scheduler clears `nominatedNodeName` of Pod P. By doing this, scheduler
 makes Pod P eligible to preempt Pods on another Node.
 
@@ -288,7 +288,7 @@ enough demand and if we find an algorithm with reasonable performance.
 
 ## Troubleshooting
 
-Pod priority and pre-emption can have unwanted side effects. Here are some
+Pod priority and preemption can have unwanted side effects. Here are some
 examples of potential problems and ways to deal with them.
 
 ### Pods are preempted unnecessarily

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/pod-scheduling-readiness.md

@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ The output is:
 ```
 
 To inform scheduler this Pod is ready for scheduling, you can remove its `schedulingGates` entirely
-by re-applying a modified manifest:
+by reapplying a modified manifest:
 
 {{% code_sample file="pods/pod-without-scheduling-gates.yaml" %}}
 

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/resource-bin-packing.md

@@ -57,9 +57,9 @@ the `NodeResourcesFit` score function can be controlled by the
 Within the `scoringStrategy` field, you can configure two parameters: `requestedToCapacityRatio` and
 `resources`. The `shape` in the `requestedToCapacityRatio`
 parameter allows the user to tune the function as least requested or most
-requested based on `utilization` and `score` values. The `resources` parameter
-consists of `name` of the resource to be considered during scoring and `weight`
-specify the weight of each resource.
+requested based on `utilization` and `score` values. The `resources` parameter 
+comprises both the `name` of the resource to be considered during scoring and 
+its corresponding `weight`, which specifies the weight of each resource.
 
 Below is an example configuration that sets
 the bin packing behavior for extended resources `intel.com/foo` and `intel.com/bar`

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/scheduler-perf-tuning.md

@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ If you don't specify a threshold, Kubernetes calculates a figure using a
 linear formula that yields 50% for a 100-node cluster and yields 10%
 for a 5000-node cluster. The lower bound for the automatic value is 5%.
 
-This means that, the kube-scheduler always scores at least 5% of your cluster no
+This means that the kube-scheduler always scores at least 5% of your cluster no
 matter how large the cluster is, unless you have explicitly set
 `percentageOfNodesToScore` to be smaller than 5.
 

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/scheduling-framework.md

@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ called for that node. Nodes may be evaluated concurrently.
 
 ### PostFilter {#post-filter}
 
-These plugins are called after Filter phase, but only when no feasible nodes
+These plugins are called after the Filter phase, but only when no feasible nodes
 were found for the pod. Plugins are called in their configured order. If
 any postFilter plugin marks the node as `Schedulable`, the remaining plugins
 will not be called. A typical PostFilter implementation is preemption, which

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/taint-and-toleration.md

@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ An empty `effect` matches all effects with key `key1`.
 
 {{< /note >}}
 
-The above example used `effect` of `NoSchedule`. Alternatively, you can use `effect` of `PreferNoSchedule`.
+The above example used the `effect` of `NoSchedule`. Alternatively, you can use the `effect` of `PreferNoSchedule`.
 
 
 The allowed values for the `effect` field are:
@@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ are true. The following taints are built in:
  * `node.kubernetes.io/network-unavailable`: Node's network is unavailable.
  * `node.kubernetes.io/unschedulable`: Node is unschedulable.
  * `node.cloudprovider.kubernetes.io/uninitialized`: When the kubelet is started
-    with "external" cloud provider, this taint is set on a node to mark it
+    with an "external" cloud provider, this taint is set on a node to mark it
     as unusable. After a controller from the cloud-controller-manager initializes
     this node, the kubelet removes this taint.
 

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints.md

@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ spec:
 ```
 
 You can read more about this field by running `kubectl explain Pod.spec.topologySpreadConstraints` or
-refer to [scheduling](/docs/reference/kubernetes-api/workload-resources/pod-v1/#scheduling) section of the API reference for Pod.
+refer to the [scheduling](/docs/reference/kubernetes-api/workload-resources/pod-v1/#scheduling) section of the API reference for Pod.
 
 ### Spread constraint definition
 
@@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ follows the API definition of the field; however, the behavior is more likely to
 confusing and troubleshooting is less straightforward.
 
 You need a mechanism to ensure that all the nodes in a topology domain (such as a
-cloud provider region) are labelled consistently.
+cloud provider region) are labeled consistently.
 To avoid you needing to manually label nodes, most clusters automatically
 populate well-known labels such as `kubernetes.io/hostname`. Check whether
 your cluster supports this.
@@ -263,7 +263,7 @@ your cluster supports this.
 
 ### Example: one topology spread constraint {#example-one-topologyspreadconstraint}
 
-Suppose you have a 4-node cluster where 3 Pods labelled `foo: bar` are located in
+Suppose you have a 4-node cluster where 3 Pods labeled `foo: bar` are located in
 node1, node2 and node3 respectively:
 
 {{<mermaid>}}
@@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ can use a manifest similar to:
 {{% code_sample file="pods/topology-spread-constraints/one-constraint.yaml" %}}
 
 From that manifest, `topologyKey: zone` implies the even distribution will only be applied
-to nodes that are labelled `zone: <any value>` (nodes that don't have a `zone` label
+to nodes that are labeled `zone: <any value>` (nodes that don't have a `zone` label
 are skipped). The field `whenUnsatisfiable: DoNotSchedule` tells the scheduler to let the
 incoming Pod stay pending if the scheduler can't find a way to satisfy the constraint.
 
@@ -494,7 +494,7 @@ There are some implicit conventions worth noting here:
   above example, if you remove the incoming Pod's labels, it can still be placed onto
   nodes in zone `B`, since the constraints are still satisfied. However, after that
   placement, the degree of imbalance of the cluster remains unchanged - it's still zone `A`
-  having 2 Pods labelled as `foo: bar`, and zone `B` having 1 Pod labelled as
+  having 2 Pods labeled as `foo: bar`, and zone `B` having 1 Pod labeled as
   `foo: bar`. If this is not what you expect, update the workload's
   `topologySpreadConstraints[*].labelSelector` to match the labels in the pod template.
 
@@ -618,7 +618,7 @@ section of the enhancement proposal about Pod topology spread constraints.
   because, in this case, those topology domains won't be considered until there is
   at least one node in them.
 
-  You can work around this by using an cluster autoscaling tool that is aware of
+  You can work around this by using a cluster autoscaling tool that is aware of
   Pod topology spread constraints and is also aware of the overall set of topology
   domains.