Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH V2] ipc/sem.c: Mundane typo fixes | From | Randy Dunlap <> | Date | Thu, 25 Mar 2021 19:29:12 -0700 |
| |
On 3/25/21 7:22 PM, Bhaskar Chowdhury wrote: > > s/runtine/runtime/ > s/AQUIRE/ACQUIRE/ > s/seperately/separately/ > s/wont/won\'t/ > s/succesfull/successful/ > > Signed-off-by: Bhaskar Chowdhury <unixbhaskar@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
> --- > Changes from V1: > Wrongly spelt filename in the subject line, corrected. > > ipc/sem.c | 10 +++++----- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/ipc/sem.c b/ipc/sem.c > index f6c30a85dadf..0897dac27f43 100644 > --- a/ipc/sem.c > +++ b/ipc/sem.c > @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ > * - two Linux specific semctl() commands: SEM_STAT, SEM_INFO. > * - undo adjustments at process exit are limited to 0..SEMVMX. > * - namespace are supported. > - * - SEMMSL, SEMMNS, SEMOPM and SEMMNI can be configured at runtine by writing > + * - SEMMSL, SEMMNS, SEMOPM and SEMMNI can be configured at runtime by writing > * to /proc/sys/kernel/sem. > * - statistics about the usage are reported in /proc/sysvipc/sem. > * > @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ static int sysvipc_sem_proc_show(struct seq_file *s, void *it); > * Setting it to a result code is a RELEASE, this is ensured by both a > * smp_store_release() (for case a) and while holding sem_lock() > * (for case b). > - * The AQUIRE when reading the result code without holding sem_lock() is > + * The ACQUIRE when reading the result code without holding sem_lock() is > * achieved by using READ_ONCE() + smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep(). > * (case a above). > * Reading the result code while holding sem_lock() needs no further barriers, > @@ -821,7 +821,7 @@ static inline int check_restart(struct sem_array *sma, struct sem_queue *q) > > /* It is impossible that someone waits for the new value: > * - complex operations always restart. > - * - wait-for-zero are handled seperately. > + * - wait-for-zero are handled separately. > * - q is a previously sleeping simple operation that > * altered the array. It must be a decrement, because > * simple increments never sleep. > @@ -1046,7 +1046,7 @@ static void do_smart_update(struct sem_array *sma, struct sembuf *sops, int nsop > * - No complex ops, thus all sleeping ops are > * decrease. > * - if we decreased the value, then any sleeping > - * semaphore ops wont be able to run: If the > + * semaphore ops won't be able to run: If the > * previous value was too small, then the new > * value will be too small, too. > */ > @@ -2108,7 +2108,7 @@ static long do_semtimedop(int semid, struct sembuf __user *tsops, > queue.dupsop = dupsop; > > error = perform_atomic_semop(sma, &queue); > - if (error == 0) { /* non-blocking succesfull path */ > + if (error == 0) { /* non-blocking successful path */ > DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q); > > /* > --
-- ~Randy
| |