| Message ID | 20210326005932.8238-1-unixbhaskar@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | btrfs: Fix a typo | expand |
On 2021/03/26 10:02, Bhaskar Chowdhury wrote: > > s/reponsible/responsible/ > > Signed-off-by: Bhaskar Chowdhury <unixbhaskar@gmail.com> > --- > fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c > index 3d9088eab2fc..14de898967bf 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c > @@ -2426,7 +2426,7 @@ static void drop_csum_range(struct scrub_ctx *sctx, struct btrfs_ordered_sum *su > * the csum into @csum. > * > * The search source is sctx->csum_list, which is a pre-populated list > - * storing bytenr ordered csum ranges. We're reponsible to cleanup any range > + * storing bytenr ordered csum ranges. We're responsible to cleanup any range If you are at fixing typos, you may as well fix the grammar at the same time :) We're responsible to cleanup... -> We're responsible for cleaning up... > * that is before @logical. > * > * Return 0 if there is no csum for the range. > -- > 2.26.2 > >
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 06:29:32AM +0530, Bhaskar Chowdhury wrote: > > s/reponsible/responsible/ So this is exactly what I don't want to see happen - one patch per typo. I tried to explain it in the previous patch, please either fix all typos under fs/btrfs or don't bother.
On 14:47 Fri 26 Mar 2021, David Sterba wrote: >On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 06:29:32AM +0530, Bhaskar Chowdhury wrote: >> >> s/reponsible/responsible/ > >So this is exactly what I don't want to see happen - one patch per typo. >I tried to explain it in the previous patch, please either fix all typos >under fs/btrfs or don't bother. As I mentioned in my previous correspondence to , I have my way of doing thing . The problem is , you are getting accustomed with some specific method and you are thinking that is the "only way" of doing the "right thing" . Please , think others are also think in different way too. The goal to make it looks good and productive...don't you think so??? ..and I said I do bother ,it's just not about this specific segment but about the whole kernel. Or is it some sort of special flow brtfs subsystem are following , which I am not aware off?? Please do let me.
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c index 3d9088eab2fc..14de898967bf 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/scrub.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/scrub.c @@ -2426,7 +2426,7 @@ static void drop_csum_range(struct scrub_ctx *sctx, struct btrfs_ordered_sum *su * the csum into @csum. * * The search source is sctx->csum_list, which is a pre-populated list - * storing bytenr ordered csum ranges. We're reponsible to cleanup any range + * storing bytenr ordered csum ranges. We're responsible to cleanup any range * that is before @logical. * * Return 0 if there is no csum for the range.
s/reponsible/responsible/ Signed-off-by: Bhaskar Chowdhury <unixbhaskar@gmail.com> --- fs/btrfs/scrub.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) -- 2.26.2