Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753700AbcDYGhq (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Apr 2016 02:37:46 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com ([74.125.82.68]:33981 "EHLO mail-wm0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753646AbcDYGhn (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Apr 2016 02:37:43 -0400 From: Eric Engestrom To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Eric Engestrom , Jonathan Corbet , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH 34/41] Documentation: robust-futexes: fix spelling mistakes Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 07:37:00 +0100 Message-Id: <1461566229-4717-8-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: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1283 Lines: 32 Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom --- Documentation/robust-futexes.txt | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/robust-futexes.txt b/Documentation/robust-futexes.txt index af6fce2..61c22d6 100644 --- a/Documentation/robust-futexes.txt +++ b/Documentation/robust-futexes.txt @@ -126,9 +126,9 @@ vma based method: - no VM changes are needed - 'struct address_space' is left alone. - - no registration of individual locks is needed: robust mutexes dont + - no registration of individual locks is needed: robust mutexes don't need any extra per-lock syscalls. Robust mutexes thus become a very - lightweight primitive - so they dont force the application designer + lightweight primitive - so they don't force the application designer to do a hard choice between performance and robustness - robust mutexes are just as fast. @@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ and the remaining bits are for the TID. Testing, architecture support ----------------------------- -i've tested the new syscalls on x86 and x86_64, and have made sure the +I've tested the new syscalls on x86 and x86_64, and have made sure the parsing of the userspace list is robust [ ;-) ] even if the list is deliberately corrupted. -- 2.8.0