Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753580AbcDYGha (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 25 Apr 2016 02:37:30 -0400
Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:33833 "EHLO
	mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753488AbcDYGh2 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 25 Apr 2016 02:37:28 -0400
From: Eric Engestrom <eric@engestrom.ch>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Eric Engestrom <eric@engestrom.ch>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 28/41] Documentation: locking: fix spelling mistakes
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 07:36:54 +0100
Message-Id: <1461566229-4717-2-git-send-email-eric@engestrom.ch>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.8.0
In-Reply-To: <1461566229-4717-1-git-send-email-eric@engestrom.ch>
References: <1461543878-3639-1-git-send-email-eric@engestrom.ch>
 <1461566229-4717-1-git-send-email-eric@engestrom.ch>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1299
Lines: 29

Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom <eric@engestrom.ch>
---
 Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.txt | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.txt b/Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.txt
index 5001280..9de1c15 100644
--- a/Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.txt
+++ b/Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.txt
@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ between any two lock-classes:
    <hardirq-safe>   ->  <hardirq-unsafe>
    <softirq-safe>   ->  <softirq-unsafe>
 
-The first rule comes from the fact the a hardirq-safe lock could be
+The first rule comes from the fact that a hardirq-safe lock could be
 taken by a hardirq context, interrupting a hardirq-unsafe lock - and
 thus could result in a lock inversion deadlock. Likewise, a softirq-safe
 lock could be taken by an softirq context, interrupting a softirq-unsafe
@@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ calculated, which hash is unique for every lock chain. The hash value,
 when the chain is validated for the first time, is then put into a hash
 table, which hash-table can be checked in a lockfree manner. If the
 locking chain occurs again later on, the hash table tells us that we
-dont have to validate the chain again.
+don't have to validate the chain again.
 
 Troubleshooting:
 ----------------
-- 
2.8.0