dt-bindings: document rk3399 rk-timer bindings

[firefly-linux-kernel-4.4.55.git] / Documentation / robust-futexes.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/robust-futexes.txt b/Documentation/robust-futexes.txt
index df82d75245a01b5055c6793fa822efe949982a2e..af6fce23e4847709d32ddee025cafb055326f171 100644 (file)
--- a/Documentation/robust-futexes.txt
+++ b/Documentation/robust-futexes.txt
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ comparison. If the thread has registered a list, then normally the list
 is empty. If the thread/process crashed or terminated in some incorrect
 way then the list might be non-empty: in this case the kernel carefully
 walks the list [not trusting it], and marks all locks that are owned by
-this thread with the FUTEX_OWNER_DEAD bit, and wakes up one waiter (if
+this thread with the FUTEX_OWNER_DIED bit, and wakes up one waiter (if
 any).
 
 The list is guaranteed to be private and per-thread at do_exit() time,
@@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ for new threads, without the need of another syscall.]
 So there is virtually zero overhead for tasks not using robust futexes,
 and even for robust futex users, there is only one extra syscall per
 thread lifetime, and the cleanup operation, if it happens, is fast and
-straightforward. The kernel doesnt have any internal distinction between
+straightforward. The kernel doesn't have any internal distinction between
 robust and normal futexes.
 
 If a futex is found to be held at exit time, the kernel sets the
@@ -210,7 +210,7 @@ i386 and x86_64 syscalls are wired up at the moment, and Ulrich has
 tested the new glibc code (on x86_64 and i386), and it works for his
 robust-mutex testcases.
 
-All other architectures should build just fine too - but they wont have
+All other architectures should build just fine too - but they won't have
 the new syscalls yet.
 
 Architectures need to implement the new futex_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic()