Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220430191122.8667-6-Julia.Lawall@inria.fr> <mhng-523319d8-fda9-4737-9c43-d54bcfd7a7f2@palmer-ri-x1c9>
In-Reply-To: <mhng-523319d8-fda9-4737-9c43-d54bcfd7a7f2@palmer-ri-x1c9>
From:   Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>
Date:   Fri, 3 Jun 2022 10:03:00 +0530
Message-ID: <CAAhSdy3+imWabbArUAg0Bki3qvD1PGVB-L-xY5CvNa_YBu80aA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: (RISC-V KVM) Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: fix typos in comments
To:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
Cc:     Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr>,
        kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
        Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        KVM General <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR RISC-V (KVM/riscv)" 
        <kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 9:56 AM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 12:11:20 PDT (-0700), Julia.Lawall@inria.fr wrote:
> > Various spelling mistakes in comments.
> > Detected with the help of Coccinelle.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr>
> >
> > ---
> >  arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c |    2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c
> > index 2fa4f7b1813d..4a2178c60b5d 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vmid.c
> > @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ void kvm_riscv_stage2_vmid_update(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >                * We ran out of VMIDs so we increment vmid_version and
> >                * start assigning VMIDs from 1.
> >                *
> > -              * This also means existing VMIDs assignement to all Guest
> > +              * This also means existing VMIDs assignment to all Guest
> >                * instances is invalid and we have force VMID re-assignement
> >                * for all Guest instances. The Guest instances that were not
> >                * running will automatically pick-up new VMIDs because will
>
> Anup: I'm guessing you didn't see this because it didn't have KVM in the
> subject?
>
> Reviewed-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
> Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
>
> if that helps any, I don't see in anywhere but not sure if I'm just
> missing it.

Thanks Palmer, I had already planned to pick this as a RC fix for 5.19
but I forgot to reply here.

Regards,
Anup