[PATCH tip/core/rcu 16/16] Documentation: rewrite confusing statement about memory barriers

[Paul E. McKenney]

From: "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

In this specific portion of the write memory barriers description,
the documentation mentions sequential order of stores, which is
confusing since sequential ordering is not guaranteed.

This patch tries to improve the doc in order to avoid any
mis-understanding.

Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
 Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
index f37375544d71..519940ec767f 100644
--- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
+++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
@@ -383,8 +383,8 @@ Memory barriers come in four basic varieties:
      to have any effect on loads.
 
      A CPU can be viewed as committing a sequence of store operations to the
-     memory system as time progresses.  All stores before a write barrier will
-     occur in the sequence _before_ all the stores after the write barrier.
+     memory system as time progresses.  All stores _before_ a write barrier
+     will occur _before_ all the stores after the write barrier.
 
      [!] Note that write barriers should normally be paired with read or data
      dependency barriers; see the "SMP barrier pairing" subsection.
-- 
2.5.2