On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:43:24AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:54:03AM -0400, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> > deference should actually be dereference.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar <bobby.pr...@gmail.com>
> 
> Good catch.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org>

Applied, thank you both!

                                                        Thanx, Paul

> >  Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt 
> > b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
> > index 2044227..5cbd8b2 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt
> > @@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ rcu_dereference()
> >  
> >     The reader uses rcu_dereference() to fetch an RCU-protected
> >     pointer, which returns a value that may then be safely
> > -   dereferenced.  Note that rcu_deference() does not actually
> > +   dereferenced.  Note that rcu_dereference() does not actually
> >     dereference the pointer, instead, it protects the pointer for
> >     later dereferencing.  It also executes any needed memory-barrier
> >     instructions for a given CPU architecture.  Currently, only Alpha
> > -- 
> > 2.10.1
> > 
> 

Reply via email to