Fix a few typos

tools/checklocks/README.md

@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ type foo struct {
 }
 ```
 
-These semantics are enforcable on `sync.Mutex`, `sync.RWMutex` and `sync.Locker`
+These semantics are enforceable on `sync.Mutex`, `sync.RWMutex` and `sync.Locker`
 fields. Semantics with respect to reading and writing are automatically detected
 and enforced. If an access is read-only, then the lock need only be held as a
 read lock, in the case of an `sync.RWMutex`.
@@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ func foo(ts *testStruct) {
 }
 ```
 
-This pattern often applies to defer usage, which allows defered functions to be
+This pattern often applies to defer usage, which allows deferred functions to be
 fully analyzed with the lock state at time of execution.
 
 However, if a closure is passed to another function, the anonymous function

tools/checklocks/analysis.go

@@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ func (pc *passContext) checkGuards(inst almostInst, from ssa.Value, accessObj ty
 		for s, info := range ls.lockedMutexes {
 			// Is this an object for which we have facts? If there
 			// is no ability to name this object, then we don't
-			// bother with any inferrence. We also ignore any self
+			// bother with any inference. We also ignore any self
 			// references (e.g. accessing a mutex while you are
 			// holding that exact mutex).
 			if info.object == nil || accessObj == info.object {

tools/checklocks/state.go

@@ -247,7 +247,7 @@ type elemType interface {
 func (l *lockState) valueAndObject(v ssa.Value) (string, types.Object) {
 	switch x := v.(type) {
 	case *ssa.Parameter:
-		// Was this provided as a paramter for a local anonymous
+		// Was this provided as a parameter for a local anonymous
 		// function invocation?
 		v, ok := l.stored[x]
 		if ok {

tools/checklocks/test/incompat.go

@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ import (
 	"sync"
 )
 
-// badFieldsStruct verifies that refering invalid fields fails.
+// badFieldsStruct verifies that referring invalid fields fails.
 type badFieldsStruct struct {
 	// +checklocks:mu
 	x int // +checklocksfail