linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] drm: fix subtle spelling error in drm_crtc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 15 Mar 2019 11:48:13 +0100
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To:     Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com>
Cc:     linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
        Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] drm: fix subtle spelling error in drm_crtc_state

On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 10:04:18PM +0000, Kieran Bingham wrote:
> The drm_crtc_state documentation contains a subtle misspelling of the
> word subtle. Correct it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com>

Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>

> ---
>  include/drm/drm_crtc.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/drm/drm_crtc.h b/include/drm/drm_crtc.h
> index 85abd3fe9e83..f2b3762636df 100644
> --- a/include/drm/drm_crtc.h
> +++ b/include/drm/drm_crtc.h
> @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ struct drm_plane_helper_funcs;
>  /**
>   * struct drm_crtc_state - mutable CRTC state
>   *
> - * Note that the distinction between @enable and @active is rather subtile:
> + * Note that the distinction between @enable and @active is rather subtle:
>   * Flipping @active while @enable is set without changing anything else may
>   * never return in a failure from the &drm_mode_config_funcs.atomic_check
>   * callback. Userspace assumes that a DPMS On will always succeed. In other
> -- 
> 2.19.1
> 

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch