diff mbox

[1/2] vfio: remove a duplicated word in comments

Message ID 1478833296-25853-1-git-send-email-caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Cao jin Nov. 11, 2016, 3:01 a.m. UTC 
Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
 hw/vfio/pci.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Cao jin Dec. 21, 2016, 6:29 a.m. UTC | #1 
ping

On 11/11/2016 11:01 AM, Cao jin wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  hw/vfio/pci.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/vfio/pci.c b/hw/vfio/pci.c
> index 31aaecb..c94987c 100644
> --- a/hw/vfio/pci.c
> +++ b/hw/vfio/pci.c
> @@ -1881,8 +1881,8 @@ static void vfio_add_ext_cap(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev)
>       * 0 is reserved for this since absence of capabilities is indicated by
>       * 0 for the ID, version, AND next pointer.  However, pcie_add_capability()
>       * uses ID 0 as reserved for list management and will incorrectly match and
> -     * assert if we attempt to pre-load the head of the chain with with this
> -     * ID.  Use ID 0xFFFF temporarily since it is also seems to be reserved in
> +     * assert if we attempt to pre-load the head of the chain with this ID.
> +     * Use ID 0xFFFF temporarily since it is also seems to be reserved in
>       * part for identifying absence of capabilities in a root complex register
>       * block.  If the ID still exists after adding capabilities, switch back to
>       * zero.  We'll mark this entire first dword as emulated for this purpose.
>
Michael Tokarev Jan. 12, 2017, 11:08 a.m. UTC | #2 
11.11.2016 06:01, Cao jin wrote:
[]

Applied to -trivial, thank you!

/mjt
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/hw/vfio/pci.c b/hw/vfio/pci.c
index 31aaecb..c94987c 100644
--- a/hw/vfio/pci.c
+++ b/hw/vfio/pci.c
@@ -1881,8 +1881,8 @@  static void vfio_add_ext_cap(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev)
      * 0 is reserved for this since absence of capabilities is indicated by
      * 0 for the ID, version, AND next pointer.  However, pcie_add_capability()
      * uses ID 0 as reserved for list management and will incorrectly match and
-     * assert if we attempt to pre-load the head of the chain with with this
-     * ID.  Use ID 0xFFFF temporarily since it is also seems to be reserved in
+     * assert if we attempt to pre-load the head of the chain with this ID.
+     * Use ID 0xFFFF temporarily since it is also seems to be reserved in
      * part for identifying absence of capabilities in a root complex register
      * block.  If the ID still exists after adding capabilities, switch back to
      * zero.  We'll mark this entire first dword as emulated for this purpose.