workqueue: fix typos in comments

tj: dropped iff -> if, iff is if and only if not a typo.  Spotted by
    Randy Dunlap.

Signed-off-by: Shailendra Verma <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>

kernel/workqueue.c

@@ -988,7 +988,7 @@ static struct worker *find_worker_executing_work(struct worker_pool *pool,
  * move_linked_works - move linked works to a list
  * @work: start of series of works to be scheduled
  * @head: target list to append @work to
- * @nextp: out paramter for nested worklist walking
+ * @nextp: out parameter for nested worklist walking
  *
  * Schedule linked works starting from @work to @head.  Work series to
  * be scheduled starts at @work and includes any consecutive work with
@@ -3063,7 +3063,7 @@ static bool wqattrs_equal(const struct workqueue_attrs *a,
  * init_worker_pool - initialize a newly zalloc'd worker_pool
  * @pool: worker_pool to initialize
  *
- * Initiailize a newly zalloc'd @pool.  It also allocates @pool->attrs.
+ * Initialize a newly zalloc'd @pool.  It also allocates @pool->attrs.
  *
  * Return: 0 on success, -errno on failure.  Even on failure, all fields
  * inside @pool proper are initialized and put_unbound_pool() can be called
@@ -4414,7 +4414,7 @@ static void rebind_workers(struct worker_pool *pool)
 	/*
 	 * Restore CPU affinity of all workers.  As all idle workers should
 	 * be on the run-queue of the associated CPU before any local
-	 * wake-ups for concurrency management happen, restore CPU affinty
+	 * wake-ups for concurrency management happen, restore CPU affinity
 	 * of all workers first and then clear UNBOUND.  As we're called
 	 * from CPU_ONLINE, the following shouldn't fail.
 	 */
@@ -5105,7 +5105,7 @@ int workqueue_sysfs_register(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
 	int ret;
 
 	/*
-	 * Adjusting max_active or creating new pwqs by applyting
+	 * Adjusting max_active or creating new pwqs by applying
 	 * attributes breaks ordering guarantee.  Disallow exposing ordered
 	 * workqueues.
 	 */