Re: [PATCH V2] ipc/sem.c: Mundane typo fixes

[Randy Dunlap]

On 3/25/21 7:22 PM, Bhaskar Chowdhury wrote:
> 
> s/runtine/runtime/
> s/AQUIRE/ACQUIRE/
> s/seperately/separately/
> s/wont/won\'t/
> s/succesfull/successful/
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bhaskar Chowdhury <unixbhaskar@xxxxxxxxx>

Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> ---
>  Changes from V1:
>   Wrongly spelt filename in the subject line, corrected.
> 
>  ipc/sem.c | 10 +++++-----
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/ipc/sem.c b/ipc/sem.c
> index f6c30a85dadf..0897dac27f43 100644
> --- a/ipc/sem.c
> +++ b/ipc/sem.c
> @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
>   * - two Linux specific semctl() commands: SEM_STAT, SEM_INFO.
>   * - undo adjustments at process exit are limited to 0..SEMVMX.
>   * - namespace are supported.
> - * - SEMMSL, SEMMNS, SEMOPM and SEMMNI can be configured at runtine by writing
> + * - SEMMSL, SEMMNS, SEMOPM and SEMMNI can be configured at runtime by writing
>   *   to /proc/sys/kernel/sem.
>   * - statistics about the usage are reported in /proc/sysvipc/sem.
>   *
> @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ static int sysvipc_sem_proc_show(struct seq_file *s, void *it);
>   * Setting it to a result code is a RELEASE, this is ensured by both a
>   * smp_store_release() (for case a) and while holding sem_lock()
>   * (for case b).
> - * The AQUIRE when reading the result code without holding sem_lock() is
> + * The ACQUIRE when reading the result code without holding sem_lock() is
>   * achieved by using READ_ONCE() + smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep().
>   * (case a above).
>   * Reading the result code while holding sem_lock() needs no further barriers,
> @@ -821,7 +821,7 @@ static inline int check_restart(struct sem_array *sma, struct sem_queue *q)
> 
>  	/* It is impossible that someone waits for the new value:
>  	 * - complex operations always restart.
> -	 * - wait-for-zero are handled seperately.
> +	 * - wait-for-zero are handled separately.
>  	 * - q is a previously sleeping simple operation that
>  	 *   altered the array. It must be a decrement, because
>  	 *   simple increments never sleep.
> @@ -1046,7 +1046,7 @@ static void do_smart_update(struct sem_array *sma, struct sembuf *sops, int nsop
>  			 * - No complex ops, thus all sleeping ops are
>  			 *   decrease.
>  			 * - if we decreased the value, then any sleeping
> -			 *   semaphore ops wont be able to run: If the
> +			 *   semaphore ops won't be able to run: If the
>  			 *   previous value was too small, then the new
>  			 *   value will be too small, too.
>  			 */
> @@ -2108,7 +2108,7 @@ static long do_semtimedop(int semid, struct sembuf __user *tsops,
>  	queue.dupsop = dupsop;
> 
>  	error = perform_atomic_semop(sma, &queue);
> -	if (error == 0) { /* non-blocking succesfull path */
> +	if (error == 0) { /* non-blocking successful path */
>  		DEFINE_WAKE_Q(wake_q);
> 
>  		/*
> --


-- 
~Randy