lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:41:32 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2] docs: locking: Add 'need' to hardirq section

Add the missing word to make this sentence read properly.

Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
---
 Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst
index a8518ac0d31d..9850c1e52607 100644
--- a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst
+++ b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst
@@ -263,7 +263,7 @@ by a hardware interrupt on another CPU. This is where
 interrupts on that cpu, then grab the lock.
 :c:func:`spin_unlock_irq()` does the reverse.
 
-The irq handler does not to use :c:func:`spin_lock_irq()`, because
+The irq handler does not need to use :c:func:`spin_lock_irq()`, because
 the softirq cannot run while the irq handler is running: it can use
 :c:func:`spin_lock()`, which is slightly faster. The only exception
 would be if a different hardware irq handler uses the same lock:
-- 
Sent by a computer, using git, on the internet

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ