netdev - Re: [RESEND net-next 2/4] net: bonding: remove repeated word

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 30 Mar 2021 09:05:59 -0700
From:   Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
To:     Huazhong Tan <tanhuazhong@...wei.com>
cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
        vfalico@...il.com, andrew@...n.ch, elder@...nel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, salil.mehta@...wei.com,
        yisen.zhuang@...wei.com, huangdaode@...wei.com,
        linuxarm@...neuler.org, linuxarm@...wei.com,
        Peng Li <lipeng321@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND net-next 2/4] net: bonding: remove repeated word

Huazhong Tan <tanhuazhong@...wei.com> wrote:

>From: Peng Li <lipeng321@...wei.com>
>
>Remove repeated word "that".
>
>Signed-off-by: Peng Li <lipeng321@...wei.com>
>Signed-off-by: Huazhong Tan <tanhuazhong@...wei.com>
>---
> drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
>index c3091e0..3455f2c 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
>@@ -1098,7 +1098,7 @@ static void alb_fasten_mac_swap(struct bonding *bond, struct slave *slave1,
>  * If @slave's permanent hw address is different both from its current
>  * address and from @bond's address, then somewhere in the bond there's
>  * a slave that has @slave's permanet address as its current address.
>- * We'll make sure that that slave no longer uses @slave's permanent address.
>+ * We'll make sure that slave no longer uses @slave's permanent address.

	This is actually correct as written, but I can see that it's a
bit confusing.  Rather than removing the second that, I'd suggest
changing it to "... make sure the other slave no longer uses ..." to be
clearer.

	-J

---
	-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@...onical.com