linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] tomoyo: Fixed typo in documentation

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]

Message-ID: <CAFqt6zaRP56DPRHTGMNiY3KpdOKPB_SeeuFagUbkmQKQ6mKD2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 9 Nov 2020 09:11:07 +0530
From:   Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>
To:     John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
Cc:     takedakn@...data.co.jp,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tomoyo: Fixed typo in documentation

On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 2:27 PM John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/7/20 12:24 AM, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> > Fixed typo s/Poiner/Pointer
> >
> > Fixes: 5b636857fee6 ("TOMOYO: Allow using argv[]/envp[] of execve() as conditions.")
> > Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>
> > Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
> > ---
> >   security/tomoyo/domain.c | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/security/tomoyo/domain.c b/security/tomoyo/domain.c
> > index bd748be..7b2babe 100644
> > --- a/security/tomoyo/domain.c
> > +++ b/security/tomoyo/domain.c
> > @@ -891,7 +891,7 @@ int tomoyo_find_next_domain(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
> >    *
> >    * @bprm: Pointer to "struct linux_binprm".
> >    * @pos:  Location to dump.
> > - * @dump: Poiner to "struct tomoyo_page_dump".
> > + * @dump: Pointer to "struct tomoyo_page_dump".
>
> Not worth a separate patch, especially since the original comment is merely
> copying the C sources, and as such, does not add any value.
>
> I'd either a) craft a new documentation line that adds some value, or b) just
> merge this patch into the previous one, and make a note in the commit
> description to the effect that you've included a trivial typo fix as long
> as you're there.
>

John, as patch[1/2] is dropped, can we take this patch forward with some more
updates in documentations ?