lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jan]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] io_uring: fix some spelling mistakes in comment
On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 05:12:42PM +0800, Yu Zhe wrote:
> @@ -2822,7 +2822,7 @@ static __cold void io_tctx_exit_cb(struct callback_head *cb)
> * When @in_idle, we're in cancellation and it's racy to remove the
> * node. It'll be removed by the end of cancellation, just ignore it.
> * tctx can be NULL if the queueing of this task_work raced with
> - * work cancelation off the exec path.
> + * work cancellation off the exec path.
> */
> if (tctx && !atomic_read(&tctx->in_idle))
> io_uring_del_tctx_node((unsigned long)work->ctx);
> @@ -3095,7 +3095,7 @@ __cold void io_uring_cancel_generic(bool cancel_all, struct io_sq_data *sqd)
> bool loop = false;
>
> io_uring_drop_tctx_refs(current);
> - /* read completions before cancelations */
> + /* read completions before cancellations */

"cancelations" is not a typo.

"cancelations" and "cancellations" are both valid spellings. The former
is predominantly used in the US, while the latter is predominantly used
in the UK.

--
Ammar Faizi

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-26 23:29    [W:0.034 / U:0.792 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site