There is a sentence using '{\tt}' instead of '\co{}'. This commit
updates those.
Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@xxxxxxxxx>
---
toolsoftrade/toolsoftrade.tex | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/toolsoftrade/toolsoftrade.tex b/toolsoftrade/toolsoftrade.tex
index 7cbe2f0b..8badbcaf 100644
--- a/toolsoftrade/toolsoftrade.tex
+++ b/toolsoftrade/toolsoftrade.tex
@@ -1448,10 +1448,10 @@ spin_unlock(&mutex);
\end{VerbatimU}
\QuickQuiz{
- What problems could occur if the variable {\tt counter} were
- incremented without the protection of {\tt mutex}?
+ What problems could occur if the variable \co{counter} were
+ incremented without the protection of \co{mutex}?
}\QuickQuizAnswer{
- On CPUs with load-store architectures, incrementing {\tt counter}
+ On CPUs with load-store architectures, incrementing \co{counter}
might compile into something like the following:
\begin{VerbatimU}
@@ -1461,9 +1461,9 @@ STORE r0,counter
\end{VerbatimU}
On such machines, two threads might simultaneously load the
- value of {\tt counter}, each increment it, and each store the
+ value of \co{counter}, each increment it, and each store the
result.
- The new value of {\tt counter} will then only be one greater
+ The new value of \co{counter} will then only be one greater
than before, despite two threads each incrementing it.
}\QuickQuizEnd
--
2.17.1
