[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191023091416.GB25798@willie-the-truck>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 10:14:17 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf tests: Fix a typo
On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 04:33:24PM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:
> Correct typo in comment: s/suck/stuck.
>
> Signed-off-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
> ---
> tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c b/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c
> index 166f411568a5..415903b48578 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c
> @@ -295,7 +295,7 @@ bool test__bp_signal_is_supported(void)
> * breakpointed instruction.
> *
> * Since arm64 has the same issue with arm for the single-step
> - * handling, this case also gets suck on the breakpointed
> + * handling, this case also gets stuck on the breakpointed
> * instruction.
> *
> * Just disable the test for these architectures until these
Thanks, and sorry for only spotting this after the offending patch was
merged.
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists