From d8566f15da9b1e51fd35f24321ec133095e02d06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Fox Chen Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2020 14:53:40 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] docs/memory-barriers.txt: Fix a typo in CPU MEMORY BARRIERS section Commit 39323c6 ("smp_mb__{before,after}_atomic(): update Documentation") has a typo in CPU MEORY BARRIERS section: "RMW functions that do not imply are memory barrier are ..." should be "RMW functions that do not imply a memory barrier are ...". This patch fixes this typo. Signed-off-by: Fox Chen Acked-by: Will Deacon Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney --- Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt index 17c8e0c2deb4..7367ada13208 100644 --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt @@ -1870,7 +1870,7 @@ There are some more advanced barrier functions: These are for use with atomic RMW functions that do not imply memory barriers, but where the code needs a memory barrier. Examples for atomic - RMW functions that do not imply are memory barrier are e.g. add, + RMW functions that do not imply a memory barrier are e.g. add, subtract, (failed) conditional operations, _relaxed functions, but not atomic_read or atomic_set. A common example where a memory barrier may be required is when atomic ops are used for reference