Re: [PATCH trivial] stop_machine.h: "disables preeempt" -> "disablespreemption"
From: Jiri Kosina
Date: Mon Jun 20 2011 - 10:02:40 EST
On Sun, 19 Jun 2011, Jonathan NeuschÃfer wrote:
> Use the noun instead of a misspelled verb.
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan NeuschÃfer <j.neuschaefer@xxxxxxx>
> include/linux/stop_machine.h | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/include/linux/stop_machine.h b/include/linux/stop_machine.h
> index 092dc9b..2d3f0b1 100644
> --- a/include/linux/stop_machine.h
> +++ b/include/linux/stop_machine.h
> @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static inline int try_stop_cpus(const struct cpumask *cpumask,
> * stop_machine "Bogolock": stop the entire machine, disable
> * interrupts. This is a very heavy lock, which is equivalent to
> * grabbing every spinlock (and more). So the "read" side to such a
> - * lock is anything which disables preeempt.
> + * lock is anything which disables preemption.
If there wouldn't be the typo, I'd gladly keep the old version there. But
with the typo being there anyway ... applied.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/