[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1602733983-9803-1-git-send-email-zhouzhouyi@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 03:53:03 +0000
From: Zhouyi Zhou <zhouzhouyi@...il.com>
To: paulmck@...nel.org, josh@...htriplett.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
joel@...lfernandes.org, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Zhouyi Zhou <zhouzhouyi@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH] RCU: fix a typo in comments of rcu_blocking_is_gp
There is a tiny typo in comment of function rcu_blocking_is_gp.
Signed-off-by: Zhouyi Zhou <zhouzhouyi@...il.com>
---
kernel/rcu/tree.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index f78ee75..4cca03f 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -3512,7 +3512,7 @@ void __init kfree_rcu_scheduler_running(void)
* During early boot, any blocking grace-period wait automatically
* implies a grace period. Later on, this is never the case for PREEMPTION.
*
- * Howevr, because a context switch is a grace period for !PREEMPTION, any
+ * However, because a context switch is a grace period for !PREEMPTION, any
* blocking grace-period wait automatically implies a grace period if
* there is only one CPU online at any point time during execution of
* either synchronize_rcu() or synchronize_rcu_expedited(). It is OK to
--
1.7.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists