Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
From:   Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To:     akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc:     npiggin@gmail.com, urezki@gmail.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4/5] mm/vmalloc: Add code comment for find_vmap_area_exceed_addr()
Date:   Mon,  6 Jun 2022 16:39:08 +0800
Message-Id: <20220606083909.363350-5-bhe@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220606083909.363350-1-bhe@redhat.com>
References: <20220606083909.363350-1-bhe@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

Its behaviour is like find_vma() which finds an area above the specified
address, add comment to make it easier to understand.

And also fix two places of grammer mistake/typo.

Signed-off-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
---
 mm/vmalloc.c | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
index 11dfc897de40..860ed9986775 100644
--- a/mm/vmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
@@ -790,6 +790,7 @@ unsigned long vmalloc_nr_pages(void)
 	return atomic_long_read(&nr_vmalloc_pages);
 }
 
+/* Look up the first VA which satisfies  addr < va_end,  NULL if none. */
 static struct vmap_area *find_vmap_area_exceed_addr(unsigned long addr)
 {
 	struct vmap_area *va = NULL;
@@ -929,7 +930,7 @@ link_va(struct vmap_area *va, struct rb_root *root,
 		 * Some explanation here. Just perform simple insertion
 		 * to the tree. We do not set va->subtree_max_size to
 		 * its current size before calling rb_insert_augmented().
-		 * It is because of we populate the tree from the bottom
+		 * It is because we populate the tree from the bottom
 		 * to parent levels when the node _is_ in the tree.
 		 *
 		 * Therefore we set subtree_max_size to zero after insertion,
@@ -1659,7 +1660,7 @@ static atomic_long_t vmap_lazy_nr = ATOMIC_LONG_INIT(0);
 
 /*
  * Serialize vmap purging.  There is no actual critical section protected
- * by this look, but we want to avoid concurrent calls for performance
+ * by this lock, but we want to avoid concurrent calls for performance
  * reasons and to make the pcpu_get_vm_areas more deterministic.
  */
 static DEFINE_MUTEX(vmap_purge_lock);
-- 
2.34.1