linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPICA: cleanup double 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: <CAJZ5v0g5Xxd9kBPUdsC6D4fVHfZafKiGgkTONo2mpqvfgoFDgw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 31 Jan 2022 19:51:00 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>
Cc:     Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:ACPI COMPONENT ARCHITECTURE (ACPICA)" <devel@...ica.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPICA: cleanup double word in comment

On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 2:33 PM <trix@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> From: Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>
>
> Remove the second 'know'.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>

This is ACPICA material, so it needs to be submitted to the upstream
project via https://github.com/acpica/acpica/

Also, it would be good to combine all of the analogous changes in one patch.

> ---
>  drivers/acpi/acpica/exfldio.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/exfldio.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/exfldio.c
> index bdc7a30d1217c..b92605df3872c 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/exfldio.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/exfldio.c
> @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ acpi_ex_setup_region(union acpi_operand_object *obj_desc,
>  #ifdef ACPI_UNDER_DEVELOPMENT
>         /*
>          * If the Field access is any_acc, we can now compute the optimal
> -        * access (because we know know the length of the parent region)
> +        * access (because we know the length of the parent region)
>          */
>         if (!(obj_desc->common.flags & AOPOBJ_DATA_VALID)) {
>                 if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> --
> 2.26.3
>