From 3dcd5b0fd12426a33d5c057090bd4ace06283fea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: nannxnann <51177225+nannxnann@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2022 20:46:04 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] typo in linux-sync-4.md?

From " he implementation of the `__mutex_fastpath_lock` "
=> " `t`he implementation of the `__mutex_fastpath_lock` "

Is this a typo?
if not, I will close this PR, Thanks for your review.
---
 SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md b/SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md
index 2e9d674..558486c 100644
--- a/SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md
+++ b/SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md
@@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ exit:
         return;
 ```
 
-For this moment he implementation of the `__mutex_fastpath_lock` function looks pretty easy. But the value of the `mutex->counter` may be negative after increment. In this case the: 
+For this moment the implementation of the `__mutex_fastpath_lock` function looks pretty easy. But the value of the `mutex->counter` may be negative after increment. In this case the: 
 
 ```C
 fail_fn(v);

From e9fbdea09a3e440fca87e764f7c015544d4695bf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: nannxnann <51177225+nannxnann@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2022 21:12:38 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] fix typo in linux-sync-4.md

From "function will `acct` like "
=> function will `act` like

Maybe another typo or not?
---
 SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md b/SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md
index 558486c..99adff0 100644
--- a/SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md
+++ b/SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md
@@ -303,7 +303,7 @@ static bool mutex_optimistic_spin(struct mutex *lock,
 #endif
 ```
 
-In all of these cases, the `__mutex_lock_common` function will acct like a `semaphore`. We try to acquire a lock again because the owner of a lock might already release a lock before this time:
+In all of these cases, the `__mutex_lock_common` function will act like a `semaphore`. We try to acquire a lock again because the owner of a lock might already release a lock before this time:
 
 ```C
 if (!mutex_is_locked(lock) &&

From ea81d2b8338d76aedaf6daa03c48b98a8112703e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: nannxnann <51177225+nannxnann@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2022 21:42:11 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] Update linux-sync-4.md

From "may be negative after `increment`"
=>"may be negative after `decrement`"
---
 SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md b/SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md
index 99adff0..34c1e08 100644
--- a/SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md
+++ b/SyncPrim/linux-sync-4.md
@@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ exit:
         return;
 ```
 
-For this moment the implementation of the `__mutex_fastpath_lock` function looks pretty easy. But the value of the `mutex->counter` may be negative after increment. In this case the: 
+For this moment the implementation of the `__mutex_fastpath_lock` function looks pretty easy. But the value of the `mutex->counter` may be negative after decrement. In this case the: 
 
 ```C
 fail_fn(v);