Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 28 Mar 2008 13:23:54 +0100 | | From | Sebastien Dugue <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fix typos in Documentation/unaligned-memory-access.txt |
| |
Hi Dmitri,
one more typo I guess:
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 13:10:42 +0300 Dmitri Vorobiev <dmitri.vorobiev@gmail.com> wrote:
> This patch deletes a couple of superfluous word occurrences in the > document Documentation/unaligned-memory-access.txt. > --- > Sorry for a duplicate email, I forgot to Cc LKML when sending the patch. > > Documentation/unaligned-memory-access.txt | 4 ++-- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/unaligned-memory-access.txt b/Documentation/unaligned-memory-access.txt > index 6223eac..ed57b53 100644 > --- a/Documentation/unaligned-memory-access.txt > +++ b/Documentation/unaligned-memory-access.txt > @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ here; a summary of the common scenarios is presented below: > unaligned access to be corrected. > - Some architectures are not capable of unaligned memory access, but will > silently perform a different memory access to the one that was requested, > - resulting a a subtle code bug that is hard to detect! > + resulting a subtle code bug that is hard to detect! ^ in a
Sebastien.
> > It should be obvious from the above that if your code causes unaligned > memory accesses to happen, your code will not work correctly on certain > @@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ memory and you wish to avoid unaligned access, its usage is as follows: > > u32 value = get_unaligned((u32 *) data); > > -These macros work work for memory accesses of any length (not just 32 bits as > +These macros work for memory accesses of any length (not just 32 bits as > in the examples above). Be aware that when compared to standard access of > aligned memory, using these macros to access unaligned memory can be costly in > terms of performance.
|  |