Re: [PATCH v11 01/26] mm: introduce CONFIG_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 09:36:00AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > +	 If the speculative page fault fails because of a concurrency is
> 
> 	                                     because a concurrency is

While one can use concurrency as a noun, it sounds archaic to me.  I'd
rather:

	If the speculative page fault fails because a concurrent modification
	is detected or because underlying PMD or PTE tables are not yet

> > +	 detected or because underlying PMD or PTE tables are not yet
> > +	 allocating, it is failing its processing and a classic page fault
> 
> 	 allocated, the speculative page fault fails and a classic page fault
> 
> > +	 is then tried.