Documentation: robust-futexes: fix spelling mistakes
Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom <eric@engestrom.ch> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
This commit is contained in:
parent
c0270efc51
commit
86cbbe24b4
|
@ -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.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue