From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <j...@joelfernandes.org> This commit replaces "struction" with the correct "structure".
Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <j...@joelfernandes.org> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.ibm.com> --- .../RCU/Design/Memory-Ordering/Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering.html | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Memory-Ordering/Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering.html b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Memory-Ordering/Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering.html index a346ce0116eb..e4d94fba6c89 100644 --- a/Documentation/RCU/Design/Memory-Ordering/Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering.html +++ b/Documentation/RCU/Design/Memory-Ordering/Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering.html @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ The key point is that the lock-acquisition functions, including <tt>smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()</tt> immediately after successful acquisition of the lock. -<p>Therefore, for any given <tt>rcu_node</tt> struction, any access +<p>Therefore, for any given <tt>rcu_node</tt> structure, any access happening before one of the above lock-release functions will be seen by all CPUs as happening before any access happening after a later one of the above lock-acquisition functions. -- 2.17.1
