Re: [PATCH] mm: fix duplicate words and typos

[Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>]

On 05/17/16 19:35, Li Peng wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Li Peng <lip@dtdream.com>
> ---
>  mm/memcontrol.c | 2 +-
>  mm/page_alloc.c | 6 +++---
>  mm/vmscan.c     | 7 +++----
>  mm/zswap.c      | 2 +-
>  4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 142cb61..8ff5a79 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c

> @@ -3267,8 +3267,7 @@ static int balance_pgdat(pg_data_t *pgdat, int order, int classzone_idx)
>  			/*
>  			 * There should be no need to raise the scanning
>  			 * priority if enough pages are already being scanned
> -			 * that that high watermark would be met at 100%
> -			 * efficiency.
> +			 * that high watermark would be met at 100% efficiency.

I think that this one wasn't wrong, just confusing.  Maybe change it to:
			* that the high watermark would be met at 100% efficiency.

>  			 */
>  			if (kswapd_shrink_zone(zone, end_zone, &sc))
>  				raise_priority = false;
> diff --git a/mm/zswap.c b/mm/zswap.c
> index de0f119b..6d829d7 100644
> --- a/mm/zswap.c
> +++ b/mm/zswap.c
> @@ -928,7 +928,7 @@ static int zswap_writeback_entry(struct zpool *pool, unsigned long handle)
>  	* a load may happening concurrently
>  	* it is safe and okay to not free the entry
>  	* if we free the entry in the following put
> -	* it it either okay to return !0
> +	* it either okay to return !0

That's still confusing.  Needs some kind of help.

>  	*/
>  fail:
>  	spin_lock(&tree->lock);
> 


-- 
~Randy

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>