From c8e84d2f9bc0021200a11721df0dc987d6191193 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Eric Engestrom <eric@engestrom.ch>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 07:37:06 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Documentation: x86: fix spelling mistakes
Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom <eric@engestrom.ch>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
---
Documentation/x86/intel_mpx.txt | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/x86/intel_mpx.txt b/Documentation/x86/intel_mpx.txt
index 818518a3ff01..1a5a12184a35 100644
--- a/Documentation/x86/intel_mpx.txt
+++ b/Documentation/x86/intel_mpx.txt
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ A: MPX-enabled application will possibly create a lot of bounds tables in
If we were to preallocate them for the 128TB of user virtual address
space, we would need to reserve 512TB+2GB, which is larger than the
entire virtual address space today. This means they can not be reserved
- ahead of time. Also, a single process's pre-popualated bounds directory
+ ahead of time. Also, a single process's pre-populated bounds directory
consumes 2GB of virtual *AND* physical memory. IOW, it's completely
infeasible to prepopulate bounds directories.
@@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ A: This would work if we could hook the site of each and every memory
these calls.
Q: Could a bounds fault be handed to userspace and the tables allocated
- there in a signal handler intead of in the kernel?
+ there in a signal handler instead of in the kernel?
A: mmap() is not on the list of safe async handler functions and even
if mmap() would work it still requires locking or nasty tricks to
keep track of the allocation state there.