netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: ethernet/sfc: Fix comment typo

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]

Date:   Mon, 18 Jul 2022 15:19:44 +0100
From:   Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>
To:     Jason Wang <wangborong@...rlc.com>, edumazet@...gle.com
Cc:     habetsm.xilinx@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ethernet/sfc: Fix comment typo

On 15/07/2022 05:59, Jason Wang wrote:
> The double `that' is duplicated in line 2438, remove one.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <wangborong@...rlc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/falcon/falcon.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/falcon/falcon.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/falcon/falcon.c
> index 3324a6219a09..9fcd28500939 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/falcon/falcon.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/falcon/falcon.c
> @@ -2435,7 +2435,7 @@ static void falcon_init_rx_cfg(struct ef4_nic *efx)
>  		 * supports scattering for user-mode queues, but will
>  		 * split DMA writes at intervals of RX_USR_BUF_SIZE
>  		 * (32-byte units) even for kernel-mode queues.  We
> -		 * set it to be so large that that never happens.
> +		 * set it to be so large that never happens.
>  		 */
>  		EF4_SET_OWORD_FIELD(reg, FRF_AA_RX_DESC_PUSH_EN, 0);
>  		EF4_SET_OWORD_FIELD(reg, FRF_AA_RX_USR_BUF_SIZE,
> 

Nack.  The first 'that' is a subordinating conjunction, the second is
 a demonstrative pronoun, so this is not a mere duplication.
(Admittedly, some writers would omit the conjunction, but I think the
 sentence reads more clearly with it present.)
One possible alternative would be to change the second 'that' to
 'this' or 'the above', or even 'such splitting', if you really find
 the original confusing.

-ed