From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D427BC3A59E for ; Mon, 2 Sep 2019 10:31:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A852F21897 for ; Mon, 2 Sep 2019 10:31:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fau.de header.i=@fau.de header.b="QuKQ1KhW" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730914AbfIBKbX (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Sep 2019 06:31:23 -0400 Received: from mx-rz-2.rrze.uni-erlangen.de ([131.188.11.21]:59781 "EHLO mx-rz-2.rrze.uni-erlangen.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728236AbfIBKbW (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Sep 2019 06:31:22 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 387 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 02 Sep 2019 06:31:21 EDT Received: from mx-rz-smart.rrze.uni-erlangen.de (mx-rz-smart.rrze.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:1025::1e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx-rz-2.rrze.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46MR6N4ZWFzPp4p; Mon, 2 Sep 2019 12:25:00 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fau.de; s=fau-2013; t=1567419900; bh=l5CqRKog55Myo9Fi9oeYz5lLnDQaiqDBNnVexwoenT8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From:To:CC: Subject; b=QuKQ1KhWbQbzG0czmIJTXn5/iwHCCc6jzYVsuZ55xuZvkxzJHGYB1NhbsjfZuqR/t 7jWCXIbcy28YCC4HZF19NZ8Y/CHyb9c2Q9O3ASeD/MsAVV/TM0CnstWzGu/xbJwvxl 7pwS5kBKYVY7+6eJynyos4Tvu1iisLz0CjyLj+k+8Y+waUogSZGzCamOVVUENiX6/c B1aJ8InV+FgH8oFQfZk/UU4x31Nvpb1kLGTZuKjYeYq9FWdqpAUm94iyJOGXgQTq91 LlEP5zd5Nqa9Ygzphz+VXtk86t6I3W8mcFaW4WLpKr58L2BVfXWSa28jAmwZBSHi+Y q7SpPFGKsNvSQ== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at boeck2.rrze.uni-erlangen.de (RRZE) X-RRZE-Flag: Not-Spam X-RRZE-Submit-IP: 2003:ec:6bcd:9e00:70b1:65fc:7ed4:76a Received: from Marco-E580.fritz.box (p200300EC6BCD9E0070B165FC7ED4076A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:6bcd:9e00:70b1:65fc:7ed4:76a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: U2FsdGVkX1+2H56Xe6abfk+/4FCFPj8JAiP7GkEFJts=) by smtp-auth.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 46MR6L0kknzPp4s; Mon, 2 Sep 2019 12:24:58 +0200 (CEST) From: Marco Ammon To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H . Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, trivial@kernel.org, Marco Ammon Subject: [PATCH 2/3] x86: fix typo in comment for alternative_instructions Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 12:24:35 +0200 Message-Id: <20190902102436.27396-2-marco.ammon@fau.de> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.23.0 In-Reply-To: <20190902102436.27396-1-marco.ammon@fau.de> References: <20190902102436.27396-1-marco.ammon@fau.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In the documentation for alternative_instructions, "a unlikely" should actually be "an unlikely". This patch fixes the mistake. Signed-off-by: Marco Ammon --- arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c b/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c index 0eefd497e3d8..9d3a971ea364 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c @@ -713,7 +713,7 @@ void __init alternative_instructions(void) * Don't stop machine check exceptions while patching. * MCEs only happen when something got corrupted and in this * case we must do something about the corruption. - * Ignoring it is worse than a unlikely patching race. + * Ignoring it is worse than an unlikely patching race. * Also machine checks tend to be broadcast and if one CPU * goes into machine check the others follow quickly, so we don't * expect a machine check to cause undue problems during to code -- 2.23.0