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]
Date:   Mon, 27 Nov 2023 11:41:31 -0800
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To:     attreyee-muk <tintinm2017@...il.com>, jpoimboe@...nel.org,
        jikos@...nel.org, mbenes@...e.cz, pmladek@...e.com,
        joe.lawrence@...hat.com, corbet@....net
Cc:     live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Took care of some grammatical mistakes

Hi,

On 11/27/23 07:57, attreyee-muk wrote:
> Respected Maintainers, 
> 
> I have made some grammatical changes in the livepatch.rst file where I
> felt that the sentence would have sounded more correct and would have become easy for
> beginners to understand by reading. 
> Requesting review of my proposed changes from the mainatiners. 
> 
> Thank You
> Attreyee Mukherjee
> 
> Signed-off-by: attreyee-muk <tintinm2017@...il.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst
> index 68e3651e8af9..a2d2317b7d6b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst
> @@ -35,11 +35,11 @@ and livepatching:
>  
>  All three approaches need to modify the existing code at runtime. Therefore
> -they need to be aware of each other and not step over each other's toes.
> +they need to be aware of each other and not step over each others' toes.

I've never seen that written like that, so I disagree here. FWIW.

>  Most of these problems are solved by using the dynamic ftrace framework as
>  a base. A Kprobe is registered as a ftrace handler when the function entry
>  is probed, see CONFIG_KPROBES_ON_FTRACE. Also an alternative function from

thanks.
-- 
~Randy

Powered by blists - more mailing lists