documentation: Clarify compiler store-fusion example

The compiler store-fusion example in memory-barriers.txt uses a C
comment to represent arbitrary code that does not update a given
variable.  Unfortunately, someone could reasonably interpret the
comment as instead referring to the following line of code.  This
commit therefore replaces the comment with a string that more
clearly represents the arbitrary code.

Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@gmail.com>
Acked-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
index 8367d393cba2..3729cbe60e41 100644
--- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
+++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
@@ -1550,7 +1550,7 @@ of optimizations:
      the following:
 
         a = 0;
-        /* Code that does not store to variable a. */
+        ... Code that does not store to variable a ...
         a = 0;
 
      The compiler sees that the value of variable 'a' is already zero, so
@@ -1562,7 +1562,7 @@ of optimizations:
      wrong guess:
 
         WRITE_ONCE(a, 0);
-        /* Code that does not store to variable a. */
+        ... Code that does not store to variable a ...
         WRITE_ONCE(a, 0);
 
  (*) The compiler is within its rights to reorder memory accesses unless