From d9ab15d6991379308876cd837008d62795d909ab Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Kaiwan N Billimoria Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 17:55:34 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] list_demo_rcu.c: better emphasis within the comment --- ch13/3_lockfree/list_demo_rcu/list_demo_rcu.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/ch13/3_lockfree/list_demo_rcu/list_demo_rcu.c b/ch13/3_lockfree/list_demo_rcu/list_demo_rcu.c index 82e5c5e..3e1cf4d 100644 --- a/ch13/3_lockfree/list_demo_rcu/list_demo_rcu.c +++ b/ch13/3_lockfree/list_demo_rcu/list_demo_rcu.c @@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ int add2tail(u64 v1, u64 v2, s8 achar, spinlock_t *lock) * Should we use GFP_KERNEL or GFP_ATOMIC here? * The former if in process context, else the latter. * Yes, BUT we can be in process ctx and still have been called - * from an atomic state. So, bottom lne, only the *caller* knows. + * from an atomic state. So, bottom line, *only the caller knows*. * Here, let's be safe, and use GFP_ATOMIC. */ mynode = kzalloc(sizeof(struct node), GFP_ATOMIC);