linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 8/9] KVM: s390: selftest: memop: Fix typo

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: <14319427-5239-1b63-b758-5e2d79cdd357@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 1 Oct 2022 10:13:44 +0700
From:   Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
To:     Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 8/9] KVM: s390: selftest: memop: Fix typo

On 10/1/22 04:07, Janis Schoetterl-Glausch wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Janis Schoetterl-Glausch <scgl@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c
> index 3a160ab0415b..1887685b41d2 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/s390x/memop.c
> @@ -970,7 +970,7 @@ static void test_errors_key_fetch_prot_override_enabled(void)
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * vcpu, mismatching keys on fetch,
> -	 * fetch protection override does not apply because memory range acceeded
> +	 * fetch protection override does not apply because memory range exceeded
>  	 */
>  	CHECK_N_DO(ERR_PROT_MOP, t.vcpu, LOGICAL, READ, mem2, 2048 + 1, GADDR_V(0), KEY(2));
>  	CHECK_N_DO(ERR_PROT_MOP, t.vcpu, LOGICAL, READ, mem2, PAGE_SIZE + 2048 + 1,

No patch description? Seriously?

What about this one?:

```
The word "acceded" isn't the right word to describe too much memory
situation. Substitute it with "exceeded".
```

Thanks.

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara