[PATCH] kernel/sys.c: trivial: Fix typos and formatting in comments

[Tal Zussman]

Signed-off-by: Tal Zussman <tz2294@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
 kernel/sys.c | 28 ++++++++++++++--------------
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sys.c b/kernel/sys.c
index a730c03ee607..399ef8d8cb61 100644
--- a/kernel/sys.c
+++ b/kernel/sys.c
@@ -1584,7 +1584,7 @@ int do_prlimit(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned int resource,
 
 	/*
 	 * RLIMIT_CPU handling. Arm the posix CPU timer if the limit is not
-	 * infite. In case of RLIM_INFINITY the posix CPU timer code
+	 * infinite. In case of RLIM_INFINITY the posix CPU timer code
 	 * ignores the rlimit.
 	 */
 	 if (!retval && new_rlim && resource == RLIMIT_CPU &&
@@ -1692,18 +1692,18 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(setrlimit, unsigned int, resource, struct rlimit __user *, rlim)
  * given child after it's reaped, or none so this sample is before reaping.
  *
  * Locking:
- * We need to take the siglock for CHILDEREN, SELF and BOTH
- * for  the cases current multithreaded, non-current single threaded
- * non-current multithreaded.  Thread traversal is now safe with
+ * We need to take the siglock for CHILDREN, SELF and BOTH
+ * for the cases current multithreaded, non-current single threaded
+ * non-current multithreaded. Thread traversal is now safe with
  * the siglock held.
- * Strictly speaking, we donot need to take the siglock if we are current and
- * single threaded,  as no one else can take our signal_struct away, no one
- * else can  reap the  children to update signal->c* counters, and no one else
+ * Strictly speaking, we do not need to take the siglock if we are current and
+ * single threaded, as no one else can take our signal_struct away, no one
+ * else can reap the children to update signal->c* counters, and no one else
  * can race with the signal-> fields. If we do not take any lock, the
  * signal-> fields could be read out of order while another thread was just
- * exiting. So we should  place a read memory barrier when we avoid the lock.
- * On the writer side,  write memory barrier is implied in  __exit_signal
- * as __exit_signal releases  the siglock spinlock after updating the signal->
+ * exiting. So we should place a read memory barrier when we avoid the lock.
+ * On the writer side, write memory barrier is implied in  __exit_signal
+ * as __exit_signal releases the siglock spinlock after updating the signal->
  * fields. But we don't do this yet to keep things simple.
  *
  */
@@ -2204,7 +2204,7 @@ static int prctl_set_mm(int opt, unsigned long addr,
 	 * If command line arguments and environment
 	 * are placed somewhere else on stack, we can
 	 * set them up here, ARG_START/END to setup
-	 * command line argumets and ENV_START/END
+	 * command line arguments and ENV_START/END
 	 * for environment.
 	 */
 	case PR_SET_MM_START_STACK:
@@ -2252,12 +2252,12 @@ static int prctl_get_tid_address(struct task_struct *me, int __user * __user *ti
 static int propagate_has_child_subreaper(struct task_struct *p, void *data)
 {
 	/*
-	 * If task has has_child_subreaper - all its decendants
-	 * already have these flag too and new decendants will
+	 * If task has has_child_subreaper - all its descendants
+	 * already have these flag too and new descendants will
 	 * inherit it on fork, skip them.
 	 *
 	 * If we've found child_reaper - skip descendants in
-	 * it's subtree as they will never get out pidns.
+	 * its subtree as they will never get out pidns.
 	 */
 	if (p->signal->has_child_subreaper ||
 	    is_child_reaper(task_pid(p)))
-- 
2.20.1