From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267293AbTGROvc (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:51:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268255AbTGROsx (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:48:53 -0400 Received: from vdp160.ath01.cas.hol.gr ([195.97.116.161]:24960 "EHLO pfn1.pefnos") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S271716AbTGROJN (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:09:13 -0400 From: "P. Christeas" To: Scott Robert Ladd Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 17:26:32 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: lkml MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Subject: Re: [PATCH] PATCH: typo bits (aka. linguistics in lkml) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200307181726.32548.p_christ@hol.gr> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >Alan Cox wrote: >>>>- * It's now support isochronous mode and more effective than hc_sl811.o >>>>+ * It's now support isosynchronous mode and more effective than hc_sl811.o >>> >>>I thought the correct term was `isochronous'... >> >> Perhaps someone can clarify - however isochornus is definitely wrong either way >"Isochronous" is correct; it is a synonym for "isochronal", which means >"uniform in time; of equal duration". That is, I believe, apropos to the >intended meaning of the comment above. >"Isosynchronous" does not appear in any of my dictionaries. Exactly. The valid word is 'isochronous', which characterizes timeslices of equal length. It is different from 'synchronous', which is thhings that happen at the same time, i.e. in parallel. In some extent, this word is used to mean things that will also end at the same time.