On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 2:21 AM XU pengfei <xupengfei@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Fix spelling of 'waitting' in comments. > > Signed-off-by: XU pengfei <xupengfei@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Applied to md-next. Thanks, Song > --- > drivers/md/raid5-cache.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c > index f4e1cc1ece43..058d82e7fa13 100644 > --- a/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c > +++ b/drivers/md/raid5-cache.c > @@ -1327,9 +1327,9 @@ static void r5l_write_super_and_discard_space(struct r5l_log *log, > * superblock is updated to new log tail. Updating superblock (either > * directly call md_update_sb() or depend on md thread) must hold > * reconfig mutex. On the other hand, raid5_quiesce is called with > - * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waitting > - * for all IO finish, hence waitting for reclaim thread, while reclaim > - * thread is calling this function and waitting for reconfig mutex. So > + * reconfig_mutex hold. The first step of raid5_quiesce() is waiting > + * for all IO finish, hence waiting for reclaim thread, while reclaim > + * thread is calling this function and waiting for reconfig mutex. So > * there is a deadlock. We workaround this issue with a trylock. > * FIXME: we could miss discard if we can't take reconfig mutex > */ > -- > 2.18.2 >
