[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5c1d8862-4ee6-bd17-1a61-ec32689d0578@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2023 09:54:49 +0100
From: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...nel.org>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
coresight@...ts.linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 31/35] Documentation: trace: correct spelling
On 1/27/23 07:40, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> --- a/Documentation/trace/rv/runtime-verification.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/trace/rv/runtime-verification.rst
> @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ In Linux terms, the runtime verification
> *RV monitor* abstraction. A *RV monitor* includes a reference model of the
> system, a set of instances of the monitor (per-cpu monitor, per-task monitor,
> and so on), and the helper functions that glue the monitor to the system via
> -trace, as depicted bellow::
> +trace, as depicted below::
>
> Linux +---- RV Monitor ----------------------------------+ Formal
> Realm | | Realm
Do you mind making the rv part an independent patch?
Spiting it helps in the backport of the fix to stable/distro kernels.
-- Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists