linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rt2x00: remove duplicate word in comment

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: <20210204083007.000069d2@163.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Feb 2021 08:30:07 +0800
From:   wengjianfeng <samirweng1979@....com>
To:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc:     stf_xl@...pl, helmut.schaa@...glemail.com, kvalo@...eaurora.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        wengjianfeng <wengjianfeng@...ong.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rt2x00: remove duplicate word in comment

On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 07:16:17 -0800
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:

> On 2/2/21 10:38 PM, samirweng1979 wrote:
> > From: wengjianfeng <wengjianfeng@...ong.com>
> > 
> > remove duplicate word 'we' in comment
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: wengjianfeng <wengjianfeng@...ong.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00crypto.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00crypto.c
> > b/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00crypto.c index
> > c861811..7158152 100644 ---
> > a/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00crypto.c +++
> > b/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00crypto.c @@ -179,7
> > +179,7 @@ void rt2x00crypto_rx_insert_iv(struct sk_buff *skb,
> >  	 * Make room for new data. There are 2 possibilities
> >  	 * either the alignment is already present between
> >  	 * the 802.11 header and payload. In that case we
> > -	 * we have to move the header less then the iv_len
> > +	 * have to move the header less then the iv_len
> 
> s/then/than/
> 
> >  	 * since we can use the already available l2pad bytes
> >  	 * for the iv data.
> >  	 * When the alignment must be added manually we must
> > 
> 
> 

Hi Randy,
   So you means add it for byte alignment, right? if yes,just ignore
   the patch. thanks.