Re: [PATCH][next] selftests/bpf: Fix spelling mistake "succesful" -> "successful"

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 17/08/2022 19:46, Mykola Lysenko wrote:
Hi Colin,

Thanks for your patch!

Can you change patch title to "[PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Fix spelling mistake "succesful” (kfunc_call.c)”?

Personally I think the kfunc_call.c part in the title is extraneous, it's clear it's patching that file from the diff and it's not the style
I've used of the 3,900+ patches I've had accepted in the kernel.

Colin



Regards,
Mykola

On Aug 17, 2022, at 1:34 AM, Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

!-------------------------------------------------------------------|
  This Message Is From an External Sender

|-------------------------------------------------------------------!

There is a spelling mistake in an ASSERT_OK literal string. Fix it.

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@xxxxxxxxx>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c
index 351fafa006fb..eede7c304f86 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c
@@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ static void test_destructive(void)
{
	__u64 save_caps = 0;

-	ASSERT_OK(test_destructive_open_and_load(), "succesful_load");
+	ASSERT_OK(test_destructive_open_and_load(), "successful_load");

	if (!ASSERT_OK(cap_disable_effective(1ULL << CAP_SYS_BOOT, &save_caps), "drop_caps"))
		return;
--
2.37.1






[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux