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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <7c60a6f5-414f-99e8-68c3-ca3b60fe89e9@nvidia.com>
Date:   Sun, 8 Nov 2020 20:17:09 -0800
From:   John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To:     Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.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 11/8/20 7:41 PM, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> 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 ?
> 

That's really up to the folks who work on this code. Personally I would rarely
post a patch *just* for this, but on the other hand it is a correction. Either
way is fine with me of course.


thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard
NVIDIA