linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: s3c: Fix typo in one 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <fa6a55a9-1c27-e9a8-739e-fd7ec34e3b76@canonical.com>
Date:   Mon, 15 Nov 2021 09:43:26 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
To:     Jason Wang <wangborong@...rlc.com>
Cc:     linux@...linux.org.uk, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: s3c: Fix typo in one comment

On 13/11/2021 04:11, Jason Wang wrote:
> The double `would' in the comment might be repeated. Remove one of them
> from the comment.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <wangborong@...rlc.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-s3c/mach-gta02.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s3c/mach-gta02.c b/arch/arm/mach-s3c/mach-gta02.c
> index 418939ce0fc3..174b2e55ea16 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-s3c/mach-gta02.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-s3c/mach-gta02.c
> @@ -393,9 +393,9 @@ static struct s3c2410_nand_set __initdata gta02_nand_sets[] = {
>  	[0] = {
>  		/*
>  		 * This name is also hard-coded in the boot loaders, so
> -		 * changing it would would require all users to upgrade
> -		 * their boot loaders, some of which are stored in a NOR
> -		 * that is considered to be immutable.
> +		 * changing it would require all users to upgrade their
> +		 * boot loaders, some of which are stored in a NOR that
> +		 * is considered to be immutable.
>  		 */

This is a legacy platform, bigger set of cleanups are accepted but a
patch which changes only one typo, is not. Especially that you change
here three lines for this simple one typo.

Please send a bigger cleanup for all of such issues or skip it.

Best regards,
Krzysztof