linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] docs/memory-barriers.txt: Add a missed closing parenthesis

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]

Date:   Mon, 10 Oct 2022 19:47:38 -0700
From:   SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>
To:     SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>
Cc:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, corbet@....net,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] docs/memory-barriers.txt: Add a missed closing parenthesis

On Sun, 9 Oct 2022 18:37:23 +0000 SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org> wrote:

> Hi Paul,
> 
> On Sun, 9 Oct 2022 04:10:00 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, Oct 08, 2022 at 10:49:25AM -0700, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > > Description of io_stop_wc(), which added by commit d5624bb29f49
> > > ("asm-generic: introduce io_stop_wc() and add implementation for
> > > ARM64"), have unclosed parenthesis.  This commit closes it.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: d5624bb29f49 ("asm-generic: introduce io_stop_wc() and add implementation for ARM64")
> > > Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>
> > 
> > I have pulled this in, good eyes, and thank you!
> 
> Thank you for quick reply :)
> 
> > 
> > On the other three, we have traditionally asked for an ack from a
> > Korean speaker.  Do we still feel the need to do this?
> 
> I have asked review of the patches to my friend.  I'm unsure if my friend could
> do that in a timely manner, as my friend could also be busy.  Let's wait and
> see.

Thankfully, my friend gave me a feedback for improving the patch.  He has some
mailing tools issue, so I'm saying this instead.  I will post next version of
the translations patches soon.


Thanks,
SJ

> 
> IMHO, such review is not essential for this kind of incremental document
> updates, as I'd prefer making the doc up-to-date even if it contains some
> trivial errors, as long as the history is well manged and therefore such errors
> could be fixed later with good explanations.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> SJ
> 
> [...]
>