On 02/24/2016 11:01 AM, Adam Buchbinder wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Adam Buchbinder <adam.buchbin...@gmail.com>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/memfd/fuse_test.c | 2 +-
> tools/testing/selftests/net/psock_tpacket.c | 2 +-
> tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/tm/tm-signal-msr-resv.c | 2 +-
> tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/vphn/test-vphn.c | 2 +-
> 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/fuse_test.c
> b/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/fuse_test.c
> index 67908b1..64c02d4 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/fuse_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/fuse_test.c
> @@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> * then the kernel did a page-replacement or canceled the read() (or
> * whatever magic it did..). In that case, the memfd object is still
> * all zero.
> - * In case the memfd-object was *not* sealed, the read() was successfull
> + * In case the memfd-object was *not* sealed, the read() was successful
> * and the memfd object must *not* be all zero.
> * Note that in real scenarios, there might be a mixture of both, but
> * in this test-cases, we have explicit 200ms delays which should be
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/psock_tpacket.c
> b/tools/testing/selftests/net/psock_tpacket.c
> index 24adf70..3c0ed3a 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/psock_tpacket.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/psock_tpacket.c
> @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
> *
> * Datapath:
> * Open a pair of packet sockets and send resp. receive an a priori known
> - * packet pattern accross the sockets and check if it was received resp.
> + * packet pattern across the sockets and check if it was received resp.
> * sent correctly. Fanout in combination with RX_RING is currently not
> * tested here.
> *
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/tm/tm-signal-msr-resv.c
> b/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/tm/tm-signal-msr-resv.c
> index d86653f..7c77853 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/tm/tm-signal-msr-resv.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/tm/tm-signal-msr-resv.c
> @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ void signal_usr1(int signum, siginfo_t *info, void *uc)
> #else
> ucp->uc_mcontext.regs->gpr[PT_MSR] |= (7ULL);
> #endif
> - /* Should segv on return becuase of invalid context */
> + /* Should segv on return because of invalid context */
> segv_expected = 1;
> }
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/vphn/test-vphn.c
> b/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/vphn/test-vphn.c
> index 5742f68..fef33c9 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/vphn/test-vphn.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/vphn/test-vphn.c
> @@ -274,7 +274,7 @@ static struct test {
> }
> },
> {
> - /* Parse a 32-bit value split accross two consecutives 64-bit
> + /* Parse a 32-bit value split across two consecutives 64-bit
> * input values.
> */
> "vphn: 16-bit value followed by 2 x 32-bit values",
>
I didn't notice this in time for 4.6-rc1. It will go into the 4.7-rc1
release as it is a typo fix.
thanks,
-- Shuah
--
Shuah Khan
Sr. Linux Kernel Developer
Open Source Innovation Group
Samsung Research America (Silicon Valley)
shua...@osg.samsung.com | (970) 217-8978
