Skip to contentSkip to conversation

OMAP2+: powerdomain: fix typo: lose context --> loose context

PATCH New Kevin Hilman 2 participants 3 messages Apr 21, 2011

Subsystems (3)
Arm (32-bit) Arm sub-architectures OMAP2+ support
lore
Share & tools
lore

Kevin Hilman

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 OMAP2+: powerdomain: fix typo: lose context --> loose context

Before we get any users of this function, fix the name (and comments) to use loose instead of lose.

Signed-off-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>

---
Applies to v2.6.39-rc4

 arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c |    6 +++---
 arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.h |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c +3 -3
index 9af0847..ec3423f 100644
@@ -960,18 +960,18 @@ u32 pwrdm_get_context_loss_count(struct powerdomain *pwrdm)
 }
 
 /**
- * pwrdm_can_ever_lose_context - can this powerdomain ever lose context?
+ * pwrdm_can_ever_loose_context - can this powerdomain ever loose context?
  * @pwrdm: struct powerdomain *
  *
  * Given a struct powerdomain * @pwrdm, returns 1 if the powerdomain
- * can lose either memory or logic context or if @pwrdm is invalid, or
+ * can loose either memory or logic context or if @pwrdm is invalid, or
  * returns 0 otherwise.  This function is not concerned with how the
  * powerdomain registers are programmed (i.e., to go off or not); it's
  * concerned with whether it's ever possible for this powerdomain to
  * go off while some other part of the chip is active.  This function
  * assumes that every powerdomain can go to either ON or INACTIVE.
  */
-bool pwrdm_can_ever_lose_context(struct powerdomain *pwrdm)
+bool pwrdm_can_ever_loose_context(struct powerdomain *pwrdm)
 {
 	int i;
arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.h +1 -1
index d23d979..95d5b9e 100644
@@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ int pwrdm_pre_transition(void);
 int pwrdm_post_transition(void);
 int pwrdm_set_lowpwrstchange(struct powerdomain *pwrdm);
 u32 pwrdm_get_context_loss_count(struct powerdomain *pwrdm);
-bool pwrdm_can_ever_lose_context(struct powerdomain *pwrdm);
+bool pwrdm_can_ever_loose_context(struct powerdomain *pwrdm);
 
 extern void omap2xxx_powerdomains_init(void);
 extern void omap3xxx_powerdomains_init(void);
Signature · 1 line
1.7.4
#1 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 OMAP2+: powerdomain: fix typo: lose context --> loose context

Hi Kevin,

Quoted 16 lines · Kevin Hilman

Before we get any users of this function, fix the name (and comments) to use loose instead of lose.

Signed-off-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>

---
Applies to v2.6.39-rc4

 arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c |    6 +++---
 arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.h |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c +0 -0
index 9af0847..ec3423f 100644

arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c u32 pwrdm_get_context_loss_count(struct powerdomain *pwrdm) · line 963

Quoted 5 lines
arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c +1 -1
@@ -960,18 +960,18 @@ u32 pwrdm_get_context_loss_count(struct powerdomain *pwrdm)
 }
 
 /**
- * pwrdm_can_ever_lose_context - can this powerdomain ever lose context?
+ * pwrdm_can_ever_loose_context - can this powerdomain ever loose context?

'lose' is correct in this case,. It's derived from the idiom 'context loss'. more broadly, 'loose' implies a strong sense of agency on the part of whatever is doing the 'loosing,' whereas 'lose' does not (it's the PRCM that causes the powerdomain to lose context, not the powerdomain itself - the powerdomain's logic/memory context is subject to the PRCM's whim)

- Paul

author
#2 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 OMAP2+: powerdomain: fix typo: lose context --> loose context

Quoted 22 lines · Paul Walmsley

Hi Kevin,

Quoted 18 lines · Kevin Hilman

Before we get any users of this function, fix the name (and comments) to use loose instead of lose.

Signed-off-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>

---
Applies to v2.6.39-rc4

 arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c |    6 +++---
 arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.h |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c +0 -0
index 9af0847..ec3423f 100644
@@ -960,18 +960,18 @@ u32 pwrdm_get_context_loss_count(struct powerdomain *pwrdm)
 }
Quoted 9 lines

arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c u32 pwrdm_get_context_loss_count(struct powerdomain *pwrdm) · line 963

Quoted 3 lines
arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c +1 -1
 /**
- * pwrdm_can_ever_lose_context - can this powerdomain ever lose context?
+ * pwrdm_can_ever_loose_context - can this powerdomain ever loose context?

'lose' is correct in this case,. It's derived from the idiom 'context loss'. more broadly, 'loose' implies a strong sense of agency on the part of whatever is doing the 'loosing,' whereas 'lose' does not (it's the PRCM that causes the powerdomain to lose context, not the powerdomain itself - the powerdomain's logic/memory context is subject to the PRCM's whim)

After a dictionary lookup, I guess you're right. I guess I've been spelling that wrong for a while, and it seems I'm not the only one:

http://www.elearnenglishlanguage.com/difficulties/looselose.html

Thanks for the English lesson. ;)

Kevin