netdev - Re: [PATCH] wlcore: fix spelling mistake in wl1271

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

Message-ID: <6473739f-5f3e-c32c-dad7-22b6c15d98cc@canonical.com>
Date:   Mon, 3 Apr 2017 10:44:49 +0100
From:   Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wlcore: fix spelling mistake in wl1271_warning 'iligal'
 -> 'illegal'

On 03/04/17 10:20, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-04-03 at 10:15 +0100, Colin King wrote:
>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>>
>> trivial fix to spelling mistake in wl1271_warning error message
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/debugfs.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/debugfs.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/debugfs.c
>> index 58e148d7bc7b..416080adc181 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/debugfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/debugfs.c
>> @@ -1249,7 +1249,7 @@ static ssize_t fw_logger_write(struct file *file,
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	if (wl->conf.fwlog.output == 0) {
>> -		wl1271_warning("iligal opperation - fw logger disabled by default, please change mode via wlconf");
>> +		wl1271_warning("illegal opperation - fw logger disabled by default, please change mode via wlconf");
> 
> Hi Colin.
> 
> When you do these would you please fix all the typos on the
> same line?  opperation -> operation

Sure, I stupidly missed that.

> 
> Also, generally, invalid is a better word choice than illegal
> for these situations.

Good point.
> 
> Thanks and cheers, Joe
>