xiaomi-sm8450/android_kernel_xiaomi_sm8450
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

UBI: fix multiple spelling typos

Browse Source 
Some of the typos were indicated by Adrian Hunter,
some by 'aspell'.

Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
This commit is contained in:
Artem Bityutskiy
2009-06-08 19:28:18 +03:00
parent 21d08bbcb1
commit 815bc5f8fe
4 changed files with 11 additions and 11 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

14
drivers/mtd/ubi/wl.c
View File

@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@
* used. The former state corresponds to the @wl->free tree. The latter state
* is split up on several sub-states:
* o the WL movement is allowed (@wl->used tree);
* o the WL movement is disallowed (@wl->erroneous) becouse the PEB is
* o the WL movement is disallowed (@wl->erroneous) because the PEB is
* erroneous - e.g., there was a read error;
* o the WL movement is temporarily prohibited (@wl->pq queue);
* o scrubbing is needed (@wl->scrub tree).
@@ -744,8 +744,8 @@ static int wear_leveling_worker(struct ubi_device *ubi, struct ubi_work *wrk,
* given, so we have a situation when it has not yet
* had a chance to write it, because it was preempted.
* So add this PEB to the protection queue so far,
* because presubably more data will be written there
* (including the missin VID header), and then we'll
* because presumably more data will be written there
* (including the missing VID header), and then we'll
* move it.
*/
dbg_wl("PEB %d has no VID header", e1->pnum);
@@ -790,8 +790,8 @@ static int wear_leveling_worker(struct ubi_device *ubi, struct ubi_work *wrk,
* not switch to R/O mode in this case, and give the
* upper layers a possibility to recover from this,
* e.g. by unmapping corresponding LEB. Instead, just
* put thie PEB to the @ubi->erroneus list to prevent
* UBI from trying to move the over and over again.
* put this PEB to the @ubi->erroneous list to prevent
* UBI from trying to move it over and over again.
*/
if (ubi->erroneous_peb_count > ubi->max_erroneous) {
ubi_err("too many erroneous eraseblocks (%d)",
@@ -1045,7 +1045,7 @@ static int erase_worker(struct ubi_device *ubi, struct ubi_work *wl_wrk,
/*
* If this is not %-EIO, we have no idea what to do. Scheduling
* this physical eraseblock for erasure again would cause
* errors again and again. Well, lets switch to RO mode.
* errors again and again. Well, lets switch to R/O mode.
*/
goto out_ro;
}
@@ -1161,7 +1161,7 @@ retry:
rb_erase(&e->u.rb, &ubi->erroneous);
ubi->erroneous_peb_count -= 1;
ubi_assert(ubi->erroneous_peb_count >= 0);
/* Erronious PEBs should be tortured */
/* Erroneous PEBs should be tortured */
torture = 1;
} else {
err = prot_queue_del(ubi, e->pnum);