On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 17:31:34 +0000 Russel wrote: > > Perhaps the patch should better be named "work around errata 2"... > > errata was "implemented" in hardware, not software, after all. Sorry for > > not noticing this in the first comment... > > An erratum is a statement of an error, it's a description of what's wrong > and usually a correction. If you're going to be linguistically picky, an erratum is the statement. The work-around (note: not correction, as that requires a silicon re-spin) is merely an addendum to the erratum. > > So implementing an erratum seems correct - you're implementing the > solution. You don't implement the statement of error. Surely you mean it seems _incorrect_, since you go on to say you don't do it. > > I guess an even better description would be "Implement solution for erratum 2". No, "work around" is both clearer and more accurate. Yours pedantically, Rob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
