[PATCH] rcu: Fix spelling mistake "greate"->"great"

[PATCH] rcu: Fix spelling mistake "greate"->"great"

[Mukesh Ojha]

There is a spelling mistake in file tree_exp.h,
fix this.

Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <mojha@codeaurora.org>
---
 kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
index af7e7b9..609fc87 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
@@ -781,7 +781,7 @@ static int rcu_print_task_exp_stall(struct rcu_node *rnp)
  * other hand, if the CPU is not in an RCU read-side critical section,
  * the IPI handler reports the quiescent state immediately.
  *
- * Although this is a greate improvement over previous expedited
+ * Although this is a great improvement over previous expedited
  * implementations, it is still unfriendly to real-time workloads, so is
  * thus not recommended for any sort of common-case code.  In fact, if
  * you are using synchronize_rcu_expedited() in a loop, please restructure
-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center,
Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

Re: [PATCH] rcu: Fix spelling mistake "greate"->"great"

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 01:25:57PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> There is a spelling mistake in file tree_exp.h,
> fix this.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <mojha@codeaurora.org>

Queued, thank you very much!

							Thanx, Paul

> ---
>  kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
> index af7e7b9..609fc87 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_exp.h
> @@ -781,7 +781,7 @@ static int rcu_print_task_exp_stall(struct rcu_node *rnp)
>   * other hand, if the CPU is not in an RCU read-side critical section,
>   * the IPI handler reports the quiescent state immediately.
>   *
> - * Although this is a greate improvement over previous expedited
> + * Although this is a great improvement over previous expedited
>   * implementations, it is still unfriendly to real-time workloads, so is
>   * thus not recommended for any sort of common-case code.  In fact, if
>   * you are using synchronize_rcu_expedited() in a loop, please restructure
> -- 
> Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center,
> Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
>