Re: [PATCH UPDATED] ext2: trivial: fix typo on comments inext2/inode.c

From: Jiri Kosina
Date: Thu Sep 23 2010 - 07:51:05 EST


On Fri, 10 Sep 2010, Namhyung Kim wrote:

>
> 'excpet' should be 'except'.
> 'ext3_get_branch' should be 'ext2_get_branch'.
>
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> I found another one.
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext2/inode.c b/fs/ext2/inode.c
> index 940c961..533699c 100644
> --- a/fs/ext2/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/ext2/inode.c
> @@ -458,7 +458,7 @@ failed_out:
> * the same format as ext2_get_branch() would do. We are calling it after
> * we had read the existing part of chain and partial points to the last
> * triple of that (one with zero ->key). Upon the exit we have the same
> - * picture as after the successful ext2_get_block(), excpet that in one
> + * picture as after the successful ext2_get_block(), except that in one
> * place chain is disconnected - *branch->p is still zero (we did not
> * set the last link), but branch->key contains the number that should
> * be placed into *branch->p to fill that gap.
> @@ -662,7 +662,7 @@ static int ext2_get_blocks(struct inode *inode,
> mutex_lock(&ei->truncate_mutex);
> /*
> * If the indirect block is missing while we are reading
> - * the chain(ext3_get_branch() returns -EAGAIN err), or
> + * the chain(ext2_get_branch() returns -EAGAIN err), or
> * if the chain has been changed after we grab the semaphore,
> * (either because another process truncated this branch, or
> * another get_block allocated this branch) re-grab the chain to see if

Applied.

--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/