Hi, On 11/27/23 07:57, attreyee-muk wrote: > Respected Maintainers, > > I have made some grammatical changes in the livepatch.rst file where I > felt that the sentence would have sounded more correct and would have become easy for > beginners to understand by reading. > Requesting review of my proposed changes from the mainatiners. > > Thank You > Attreyee Mukherjee > > Signed-off-by: attreyee-muk <tintinm2017@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst | 8 ++++---- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst > index 68e3651e8af9..a2d2317b7d6b 100644 > --- a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst > +++ b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst > @@ -35,11 +35,11 @@ and livepatching: > > All three approaches need to modify the existing code at runtime. Therefore > -they need to be aware of each other and not step over each other's toes. > +they need to be aware of each other and not step over each others' toes. I've never seen that written like that, so I disagree here. FWIW. > Most of these problems are solved by using the dynamic ftrace framework as > a base. A Kprobe is registered as a ftrace handler when the function entry > is probed, see CONFIG_KPROBES_ON_FTRACE. Also an alternative function from thanks. -- ~Randy
