[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <91005d18-37c7-483b-bda5-2fa57a884a17@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 10:41:25 +0200
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Johnny Park <pjohnny0508@...il.com>, <horms@...nel.org>
CC: <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
<kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>, <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
<pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] [net-next] igb: Fix 2 typos in comments in igb_main.c
On 10/24/24 07:45, Johnny Park wrote:
> Fix 2 spelling mistakes in comments in `igb_main.c`.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johnny Park <pjohnny0508@...il.com>
you should collect Reviewed-by tags, as the one from Simon on v2.
for future Intel Ethernet drivers series, please target them to IWL
(net-next in the Subject becomes iwl-next)
> ---
> Changes in v3:
> - Adjust commit message
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Fix spelling mor -> more
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
> index 1ef4cb871452..fc587304b3c0 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
> @@ -1204,7 +1204,7 @@ static int igb_alloc_q_vector(struct igb_adapter *adapter,
> /* initialize pointer to rings */
> ring = q_vector->ring;
>
> - /* intialize ITR */
> + /* initialize ITR */
> if (rxr_count) {
> /* rx or rx/tx vector */
Would be great to have capitalization errors fixed too, Rx, Tx, VF, not
necessarily in this patch.
> if (!adapter->rx_itr_setting || adapter->rx_itr_setting > 3)
> @@ -3906,7 +3906,7 @@ static void igb_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> *
> * This function initializes the vf specific data storage and then attempts to
> * allocate the VFs. The reason for ordering it this way is because it is much
> - * mor expensive time wise to disable SR-IOV than it is to allocate and free
> + * more expensive time wise to disable SR-IOV than it is to allocate and free
> * the memory for the VFs.
> **/
> static void igb_probe_vfs(struct igb_adapter *adapter)
to reduce traffic, I'm fine with this, to go via any tree:
Acked-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists