On Thu, 25 Mar 2021, Bhaskar Chowdhury wrote: > On 10:05 Thu 25 Mar 2021, Miroslav Benes wrote: > >Hi, > > > >On Thu, 25 Mar 2021, Bhaskar Chowdhury wrote: > > > >> > >> s/varibles/variables/ > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Bhaskar Chowdhury <unixbhaskar@xxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> Documentation/livepatch/shadow-vars.rst | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/Documentation/livepatch/shadow-vars.rst > >> b/Documentation/livepatch/shadow-vars.rst > >> index c05715aeafa4..8464866d18ba 100644 > >> --- a/Documentation/livepatch/shadow-vars.rst > >> +++ b/Documentation/livepatch/shadow-vars.rst > >> @@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ In-flight parent objects > >> > >> Sometimes it may not be convenient or possible to allocate shadow > >> variables alongside their parent objects. Or a livepatch fix may > >> -require shadow varibles to only a subset of parent object instances. In > >> +require shadow variables to only a subset of parent object instances. In > >> these cases, the klp_shadow_get_or_alloc() call can be used to attach > >> shadow variables to parents already in-flight. > > > >you sent the same fix a couple of weeks ago and Jon applied it. > > > Ah..difficult to remember....thanks for reminding ..it seems I need to keep > track ...which I don't do at this moment ...so the patch get duplicated .. Well, you definitely should. > So.do you have any better policy to keep track??? I do not send a large amount of typo fixes, so it is quite easy to keep track of everything in my case. So please, just find something that suits you. Miroslav
