Fix typos in docstrings and function names.

[sbcl.git] / src / code / hash-table.lisp

diff --git a/src/code/hash-table.lisp b/src/code/hash-table.lisp
index d72595c..c7afa7e 100644 (file)
--- a/src/code/hash-table.lisp
+++ b/src/code/hash-table.lisp
@@ -67,8 +67,8 @@
   ;; respective key.
   (hash-vector nil :type (or null (simple-array sb!vm:word (*))))
   ;; Used for locking GETHASH/(SETF GETHASH)/REMHASH
-  (spinlock (sb!thread::make-spinlock :name "hash-table lock")
-            :type sb!thread::spinlock :read-only t)
+  (lock (sb!thread:make-mutex :name "hash-table lock")
+        :type sb!thread:mutex :read-only t)
   ;; The GC will set this to T if it moves an EQ-based key. This used
   ;; to be signaled by a bit in the header of the kv vector, but that
   ;; implementation caused some concurrency issues when we stopped
@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ values are the key and the value of the next object.
 
 Consequences are undefined if HASH-TABLE is mutated during execution of BODY,
 except for changing or removing elements corresponding to the current key. The
-applies to all threads, not just the curren one -- even for synchronized
+applies to all threads, not just the current one -- even for synchronized
 hash-tables. If the table may be mutated by another thread during iteration,
 use eg. SB-EXT:WITH-LOCKED-HASH-TABLE to protect the WITH-HASH-TABLE-ITERATOR
 for."
@@ -144,6 +144,10 @@ unspecified."
   ;; Needless to say, this also excludes some internal bits, but
   ;; getting there is too much detail when "unspecified" says what
   ;; is important -- unpredictable, but harmless.
-  `(sb!thread::with-recursive-system-spinlock
-       ((hash-table-spinlock ,hash-table))
+  `(sb!thread::with-recursive-lock ((hash-table-lock ,hash-table))
+     ,@body))
+
+(defmacro-mundanely with-locked-system-table ((hash-table) &body body)
+  `(sb!thread::with-recursive-system-lock
+       ((hash-table-lock ,hash-table))
      ,@body))