2019-10-08 08:17:18

by Pascal Van Leeuwen

Subject: RE: [PATCH][next] crypto: inside-secure: fix spelling mistake "algorithmn" -> "algorithm"

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Colin
> King
> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2019 10:14 AM
> To: Antoine Tenart <[email protected]>; Herbert Xu <[email protected]>; David
> S . Miller <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: [PATCH][next] crypto: inside-secure: fix spelling mistake "algorithmn" -> "algorithm"
>
> From: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
>
> There is a spelling mistake in a dev_err message. Fix it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_cipher.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_cipher.c b/drivers/crypto/inside-
> secure/safexcel_cipher.c
> index cecc56073337..8ccc9c59f376 100644
> --- a/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_cipher.c
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_cipher.c
> @@ -437,7 +437,7 @@ static int safexcel_aead_setkey(struct crypto_aead *ctfm, const u8 *key,
> goto badkey;
> break;
> default:
> - dev_err(priv->dev, "aead: unsupported hash algorithmn");
> + dev_err(priv->dev, "aead: unsupported hash algorithm");
> goto badkey;
> }
>
> --
> 2.20.1

Actually, the typing error is well spotted, but the fix is not correct.
What actually happened here is that a \ got accidentally deleted,
there should have been a "\n" at the end of the line ...

Regards,
Pascal van Leeuwen
Silicon IP Architect, Multi-Protocol Engines @ Verimatrix
http://www.insidesecure.com

2019-10-08 08:32:17

by Joe Perches

Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] crypto: inside-secure: fix spelling mistake "algorithmn" -> "algorithm"

On Tue, 2019-10-08 at 08:15 +0000, Pascal Van Leeuwen wrote:
> > There is a spelling mistake in a dev_err message. Fix it.
[]
> > diff --git a/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_cipher.c b/drivers/crypto/inside-
[]
> > @@ -437,7 +437,7 @@ static int safexcel_aead_setkey(struct crypto_aead *ctfm, const u8 *key,
> > goto badkey;
> > break;
> > default:
> > - dev_err(priv->dev, "aead: unsupported hash algorithmn");
> > + dev_err(priv->dev, "aead: unsupported hash algorithm");
> > goto badkey;
> > }
[]
> Actually, the typing error is well spotted, but the fix is not correct.
> What actually happened here is that a \ got accidentally deleted,
> there should have been a "\n" at the end of the line ...

Other missing newlines in the same file:
---
drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_cipher.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_cipher.c b/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_cipher.c
index cecc56073337..47fec8a0a4e1 100644
--- a/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_cipher.c
+++ b/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_cipher.c
@@ -695,21 +695,21 @@ static int safexcel_send_req(struct crypto_async_request *base, int ring,
sreq->nr_dst = sreq->nr_src;
if (unlikely((totlen_src || totlen_dst) &&
(sreq->nr_src <= 0))) {
- dev_err(priv->dev, "In-place buffer not large enough (need %d bytes)!",
+ dev_err(priv->dev, "In-place buffer not large enough (need %d bytes)!\n",
max(totlen_src, totlen_dst));
return -EINVAL;
}
dma_map_sg(priv->dev, src, sreq->nr_src, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
} else {
if (unlikely(totlen_src && (sreq->nr_src <= 0))) {
- dev_err(priv->dev, "Source buffer not large enough (need %d bytes)!",
+ dev_err(priv->dev, "Source buffer not large enough (need %d bytes)!\n",
totlen_src);
return -EINVAL;
}
dma_map_sg(priv->dev, src, sreq->nr_src, DMA_TO_DEVICE);

if (unlikely(totlen_dst && (sreq->nr_dst <= 0))) {
- dev_err(priv->dev, "Dest buffer not large enough (need %d bytes)!",
+ dev_err(priv->dev, "Dest buffer not large enough (need %d bytes)!\n",
totlen_dst);
dma_unmap_sg(priv->dev, src, sreq->nr_src,
DMA_TO_DEVICE);