workqueue, freezer: unify spelling of 'freeze' + 'able' to 'freezable'

There are two spellings in use for 'freeze' + 'able' - 'freezable' and
'freezeable'.  The former is the more prominent one.  The latter is
mostly used by workqueue and in a few other odd places.  Unify the
spelling to 'freezable'.

Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Reported-by: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Acked-by: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Acked-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@mail.ru>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: Alex Dubov <oakad@yahoo.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>

kernel/power/process.c

@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
  */
 #define TIMEOUT	(20 * HZ)
 
-static inline int freezeable(struct task_struct * p)
+static inline int freezable(struct task_struct * p)
 {
 	if ((p == current) ||
 	    (p->flags & PF_NOFREEZE) ||
@@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ static int try_to_freeze_tasks(bool sig_only)
 		todo = 0;
 		read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
 		do_each_thread(g, p) {
-			if (frozen(p) || !freezeable(p))
+			if (frozen(p) || !freezable(p))
 				continue;
 
 			if (!freeze_task(p, sig_only))
@@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ static void thaw_tasks(bool nosig_only)
 
 	read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
 	do_each_thread(g, p) {
-		if (!freezeable(p))
+		if (!freezable(p))
 			continue;
 
 		if (nosig_only && should_send_signal(p))