From a4c43b8a09805a7b9b39344c1ba304a5641aca77 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Saurav Shah Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 04:43:17 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] selftests/memfd: fix spelling mistakes Fix spelling mistakes in the comments. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240501231317.24648-1-sauravshah.31@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Saurav Shah Cc: Aleksa Sarai Cc: Greg Thelen Cc: Jeff Xu Cc: Shuah Khan Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton --- tools/testing/selftests/memfd/fuse_test.c | 2 +- tools/testing/selftests/memfd/memfd_test.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/fuse_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/fuse_test.c index 93798c8c5d54..dbc171a3806d 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/fuse_test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/fuse_test.c @@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) * then the kernel did a page-replacement or canceled the read() (or * whatever magic it did..). In that case, the memfd object is still * all zero. - * In case the memfd-object was *not* sealed, the read() was successfull + * In case the memfd-object was *not* sealed, the read() was successful * and the memfd object must *not* be all zero. * Note that in real scenarios, there might be a mixture of both, but * in this test-cases, we have explicit 200ms delays which should be diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/memfd_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/memfd_test.c index 18f585684e20..95af2d78fd31 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/memfd_test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/memfd_test.c @@ -1528,7 +1528,7 @@ static void test_share_open(char *banner, char *b_suffix) /* * Test sharing via fork() - * Test whether seal-modifications work as expected with forked childs. + * Test whether seal-modifications work as expected with forked children. */ static void test_share_fork(char *banner, char *b_suffix) {