linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2] security: fix typos and spelling errors

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]

Message-ID: <CAPdGtUw9Ee7weCmS2ZP-Hi5KwPw9-O1fGRrY_KLKQh-SWgEN5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:43:34 +0530
From: Tanya Agarwal <tanyaagarwal25699@...il.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Günther Noack <gnoack3000@...il.com>, 
	casey@...aufler-ca.com, takedakn@...data.co.jp, 
	penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp, john.johansen@...onical.com, 
	paul@...l-moore.com, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com, 
	roberto.sassu@...wei.com, dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com, eric.snowberg@...cle.com, 
	mic@...ikod.net, gnoack@...gle.com, stephen.smalley.work@...il.com, 
	omosnace@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, apparmor@...ts.ubuntu.com, 
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, 
	skhan@...uxfoundation.org, anupnewsmail@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] security: fix typos and spelling errors

On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 12:49 AM Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2025-01-13 at 15:50 +0100, Günther Noack wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 12:59:27PM +0530, Tanya Agarwal wrote:
> > > From: Tanya Agarwal <tanyaagarwal25699@...il.com>
> > >
> > > Fix typos and spelling errors in security module comments that were
> > > identified using the codespell tool.
> > > No functional changes - documentation only.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Tanya Agarwal <tanyaagarwal25699@...il.com>
> > > ---
> > > Thanks Günther, for catching this error.
> > > The irony of having a spelling mistake in a patch that fixes spelling
> > > mistakes is not lost on me :)
> > >
> > > I've fixed it in V2 of the patch. Thank you for the careful review!
> > >
> > > V2: fix spelling mistake - s/beeen/been/
> > >
> > >  security/apparmor/apparmorfs.c      | 6 +++---
> > >  security/apparmor/domain.c          | 4 ++--
> > >  security/apparmor/label.c           | 2 +-
> > >  security/apparmor/lsm.c             | 2 +-
> > >  security/apparmor/policy.c          | 4 ++--
> > >  security/integrity/evm/evm_crypto.c | 2 +-
> > >  security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c   | 2 +-
> > >  security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c   | 6 +++---
> > >  security/landlock/ruleset.c         | 2 +-
> > >  security/selinux/avc.c              | 2 +-
> > >  security/smack/smack.h              | 2 +-
> > >  security/smack/smack_access.c       | 4 ++--
> > >  security/smack/smack_lsm.c          | 6 +++---
> > >  security/smack/smackfs.c            | 2 +-
> > >  security/tomoyo/domain.c            | 2 +-
> > >  15 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> > >
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> > > b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> > > index 9b87556b03a7..cdb8c7419d7e 100644
> > > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> > > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> > > @@ -983,9 +983,9 @@ int process_buffer_measurement(struct mnt_idmap *idmap,
> > >     }
> > >
> > >     /*
> > > -    * Both LSM hooks and auxilary based buffer measurements are
> > > -    * based on policy.  To avoid code duplication, differentiate
> > > -    * between the LSM hooks and auxilary buffer measurements,
> > > +    * Both LSM hooks and auxiliary based buffer measurements are
> > > +    * based on policy. To avoid code duplication, differentiate
> >                           ^^^
> >
> > (Small nit:) This change from two-spaces-after-the-dot to a single
> > space looks like it happened accidentally.  The two-space style is
> > dominant in the ima_main.c file.
> >
> > (However, I am not involved in IMA and others have more authority to
> > review this part.  As Paul also said, reviews tend to go smoother when
> > the scope for the patch is a single subsystem - it makes the
> > responsibilities clearer.)
> >
> > > +    * between the LSM hooks and auxiliary buffer measurements,
>
> The spelling mistake being corrected in two places is auxilary -> auxiliary.  Thank
> you for noticing the unnecessary change from two spaces to one space as well.
>
> FYI, I agree with Paul the patch should be split.
>
> Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
>

Hi All,
Thanks for the review.
Sure, I'll split patches of different security subsystems so, that
they are easy for maintainers to merge.

Regards,
Tanya