[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250304065000.GB2615015@rocinante>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 15:50:00 +0900
From: Krzysztof WilczyĆski <kw@...ux.com>
To: Shradha Todi <shradha.t@...sung.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org,
lpieralisi@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
jingoohan1@...il.com, Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com,
fan.ni@...sung.com, nifan.cxl@...il.com, a.manzanares@...sung.com,
pankaj.dubey@...sung.com, cassel@...nel.org, 18255117159@....com,
xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com, renyu.zj@...ux.alibaba.com,
will@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/5] Add debugfs based error injection support in DWC
Hello,
[...]
> > + 29) Generates duplicate TLPs - duplicate_dllp
> > + 30) Generates Nullified TLPs - nullified_tlp
>
> Would the above field called "duplicate_dllp" for duplicate TLPs be
> a potential typo? Perhaps this should be called "duplicate_tlp"?
>
> I wanted to make sure we have the correct field name.
Fan or Shradha, any thoughts on this?
Would the problem be with the name of the property of the description?
Thank you!
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists