linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cxl/ocxl: Possible repeated word

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b75bb8b1-6d55-8062-00f2-dff4ff59efdd@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Jun 2023 09:43:26 +0200
From:   Frederic Barrat <fbarrat@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     zhumao001@...suo.com, ajd@...ux.ibm.com, arnd@...db.de,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:     linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cxl/ocxl: Possible repeated word


Hello,

While the correction in the comment is of course ok, the patch was sent 
as html. You may want to check/fix how it was submitted.

   Fred


On 18/06/2023 17:08, zhumao001@...suo.com wrote:
> Delete repeated word in comment. Signed-off-by: Zhu Mao <zhumao001@ 
>  208suo. com> --- drivers/misc/cxl/native. c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 
> insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/misc/cxl/native. c 
> b/drivers/misc/cxl/native. cindex
> ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
> This Message Is From an External Sender
> This message came from outside your organization.
> Report Suspicious
> <https://us-phishalarm-ewt.proofpoint.com/EWT/v1/PjiDSg!2k-hI76VihO6WgXx-IHFLxDVOAL2DdWMKjPu4ApiehtDXYjNrTR1Cj6nYDmD8SP9M8AZ7TpWUloL0Ixn_2IX60uI2MsuBkM$>
> ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
> Delete repeated word in comment.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zhu Mao <zhumao001@...suo.com>
> ---
>   drivers/misc/cxl/native.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/cxl/native.c b/drivers/misc/cxl/native.c
> index 50b0c44bb8d7..6957946a6463 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/cxl/native.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/cxl/native.c
> @@ -920,7 +920,7 @@ int cxl_attach_dedicated_process_psl9(struct 
> cxl_context *ctx, u64 wed, u64 amr)
>        * Ideally we should do a wmb() here to make sure the changes to the
>        * PE are visible to the card before we call afu_enable.
>        * On ppc64 though all mmios are preceded by a 'sync' instruction 
> hence
> -     * we dont dont need one here.
> +     * we dont need one here.
>        */
> 
>       result = cxl_ops->afu_reset(afu);