lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Aug]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] md/raid5: Fix spelling mistakes in comments
On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 2:21 AM XU pengfei <xupengfei@nfschina.com> wrote:
>
> Fix spelling of 'waitting' in comments.
>
> Signed-off-by: XU pengfei <xupengfei@nfschina.com>

Applied to md-next.

Thanks,
Song

> ---
> drivers/md/raid5-cache.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
> index f4e1cc1ece43..058d82e7fa13 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c
> @@ -1327,9 +1327,9 @@ static void r5l_write_super_and_discard_space(struct r5l_log *log,
> * superblock is updated to new log tail. Updating superblock (either
> * directly call md_update_sb() or depend on md thread) must hold
> * reconfig mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with
> - * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waitting
> - * for all IO finish, hence waitting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
> - * thread is calling this function and waitting for reconfig mutex. So
> + * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting
> + * for all IO finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim
> + * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig mutex. So
> * there is a deadlock. We workaround this issue with a trylock.
> * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig mutex
> */
> --
> 2.18.2
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-08-23 21:09    [W:1.047 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site