Should I correct all the instances of the "careful" and submit the
patch including both "carefull" and "function" word correct? or only
for the "carefull"? I have already submitted one for the "funcion"
word.
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 9:13 PM Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2020-08-04 at 08:24 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On 8/4/20 7:58 AM, Aditya Bansal wrote:
> > > From: Aditya Bansal
> > >
> > > Subject: [PATCH] fixed typo in driver/staging/wfx/hif_tx.c file
> > >
> > > Correct the spelling of function
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Aditya Bansal
> > > ---
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/wfx/hif_tx.c b/drivers/staging/wfx/hif_tx.c
> > > index 5110f9b93762..6a485fa5b72b 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/wfx/hif_tx.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/wfx/hif_tx.c
> > > @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ int wfx_cmd_send(struct wfx_dev *wdev, struct hif_msg
> > > *request,
> > >
> > > // This function is special. After HIF_REQ_ID_SHUT_DOWN, chip won't
> > > reply to any
> > > // request anymore. We need to slightly hack struct wfx_hif_cmd for that
> > > job. Be
> > > -// carefull to only call this funcion during device unregister.
> > > +// carefull to only call this function during device unregister.
> >
> > careful
>
> And if you could do all of them:
>
> $ git grep -w -i -n carefull
> arch/m68k/coldfire/pci.c:34: * We need to be carefull probing on bus 0
> (directly connected to host
> arch/openrisc/kernel/head.S:289: * a bit more carefull (if we have a
> PT_SP or current pointer
> drivers/staging/wfx/debug.c:302:// Be carefull, write() is waiting
> for a full message while read()
> drivers/staging/wfx/hif_tx.c:128:// carefull to only call this funcion during
> device unregister.
> fs/ceph/inode.c:1475: /* parent inode is not locked, be carefull */
>
>
>
