[PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Spelling s/mulit/multi/, s/currenly/currently/

[PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Spelling s/mulit/multi/, s/currenly/currently/

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Fix misspellings of "multi" and "currently".

Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
---
 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/protocols.h | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/protocols.h b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/protocols.h
index 4c75970326e655de..f51245aca2594c75 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/protocols.h
+++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/protocols.h
@@ -189,13 +189,13 @@ struct scmi_protocol_handle {
 
 /**
  * struct scmi_iterator_state  - Iterator current state descriptor
- * @desc_index: Starting index for the current mulit-part request.
+ * @desc_index: Starting index for the current multi-part request.
  * @num_returned: Number of returned items in the last multi-part reply.
  * @num_remaining: Number of remaining items in the multi-part message.
  * @max_resources: Maximum acceptable number of items, configured by the caller
  *		   depending on the underlying resources that it is querying.
  * @loop_idx: The iterator loop index in the current multi-part reply.
- * @rx_len: Size in bytes of the currenly processed message; it can be used by
+ * @rx_len: Size in bytes of the currently processed message; it can be used by
  *	    the user of the iterator to verify a reply size.
  * @priv: Optional pointer to some additional state-related private data setup
  *	  by the caller during the iterations.
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Spelling s/mulit/multi/, s/currenly/currently/

[Sudeep Holla]

On Fri, 20 Feb 2026 10:55:15 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Fix misspellings of "multi" and "currently".
> 
> 

Applied to sudeep.holla/linux (for-next/scmi/fixes), thanks!

[1/1] firmware: arm_scmi: Spelling s/mulit/multi/, s/currenly/currently/
      https://git.kernel.org/sudeep.holla/c/4e701b47c3ba
--
Regards,
Sudeep

Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Spelling s/mulit/multi/, s/currenly/currently/

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Sudeep,

On Sun, 8 Mar 2026 at 14:01, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2026 10:55:15 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Fix misspellings of "multi" and "currently".
>
> Applied to sudeep.holla/linux (for-next/scmi/fixes), thanks!
>
> [1/1] firmware: arm_scmi: Spelling s/mulit/multi/, s/currenly/currently/
>       https://git.kernel.org/sudeep.holla/c/4e701b47c3ba

Thank you!

BTW, I noticed some of your commits use the non-standard
"Message-Id:"-tag, while others use the standard "Link:"-tag (albeit
with the lore.kernel.org instead of the recommended patch.msgid.link
domain) to record the origin of patches.  Do you have different git
setups on different machines?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Spelling s/mulit/multi/, s/currenly/currently/

[Sudeep Holla]

On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 09:16:29AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Sudeep,
> 
> On Sun, 8 Mar 2026 at 14:01, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Feb 2026 10:55:15 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > Fix misspellings of "multi" and "currently".
> >
> > Applied to sudeep.holla/linux (for-next/scmi/fixes), thanks!
> >
> > [1/1] firmware: arm_scmi: Spelling s/mulit/multi/, s/currenly/currently/
> >       https://git.kernel.org/sudeep.holla/c/4e701b47c3ba
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> BTW, I noticed some of your commits use the non-standard
> "Message-Id:"-tag, while others use the standard "Link:"-tag (albeit
> with the lore.kernel.org instead of the recommended patch.msgid.link
> domain) to record the origin of patches.  Do you have different git
> setups on different machines?
> 

Not really. I used to use "Link:" and switched to "Message-Id" a while ago.
I use only one setup and if you are observing something like above, I am
doing something different. I need to check what is that, but the intention
is to use "Message-Id". Let me have a look.


-- 
Regards,
Sudeep

Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Spelling s/mulit/multi/, s/currenly/currently/

[Sudeep Holla]

On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 09:29:29AM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 09:16:29AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Hi Sudeep,
> > 
> > On Sun, 8 Mar 2026 at 14:01, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 20 Feb 2026 10:55:15 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > Fix misspellings of "multi" and "currently".
> > >
> > > Applied to sudeep.holla/linux (for-next/scmi/fixes), thanks!
> > >
> > > [1/1] firmware: arm_scmi: Spelling s/mulit/multi/, s/currenly/currently/
> > >       https://git.kernel.org/sudeep.holla/c/4e701b47c3ba
> > 
> > Thank you!
> > 
> > BTW, I noticed some of your commits use the non-standard
> > "Message-Id:"-tag, while others use the standard "Link:"-tag (albeit
> > with the lore.kernel.org instead of the recommended patch.msgid.link
> > domain) to record the origin of patches.  Do you have different git
> > setups on different machines?
> > 
> 
> Not really. I used to use "Link:" and switched to "Message-Id" a while ago.
> I use only one setup and if you are observing something like above, I am
> doing something different. I need to check what is that, but the intention
> is to use "Message-Id". Let me have a look.
> 

OK, did a quick check and see last time I used "Link:" was an year ago and
that's when I saw some discussions about use of "Link:" for other purposes and
switched to "Message-Id". Let me know if I am messing up something still,
happy to look into it and fix it up.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep

Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Spelling s/mulit/multi/, s/currenly/currently/

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Sudeep,

On Mon, 9 Mar 2026 at 10:38, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 09:29:29AM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 09:16:29AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > BTW, I noticed some of your commits use the non-standard
> > > "Message-Id:"-tag, while others use the standard "Link:"-tag (albeit
> > > with the lore.kernel.org instead of the recommended patch.msgid.link
> > > domain) to record the origin of patches.  Do you have different git
> > > setups on different machines?
> >
> > Not really. I used to use "Link:" and switched to "Message-Id" a while ago.
> > I use only one setup and if you are observing something like above, I am
> > doing something different. I need to check what is that, but the intention
> > is to use "Message-Id". Let me have a look.
>
> OK, did a quick check and see last time I used "Link:" was an year ago and
> that's when I saw some discussions about use of "Link:" for other purposes and
> switched to "Message-Id". Let me know if I am messing up something still,
> happy to look into it and fix it up.

There was indeed a fuzz about the Link:-tag[1].  In the end,
it was agreed that the Link:-tags are fine, but please use the
patch.msgid.link domain, to distinguish it from discussions (which
should use lore.kernel.org).  Unfortunately I can't find a link to that
(too many trees in the Google forest).

About Message-Id: I totally agree with [2] ;-)

Thanks!

[1] "A policy for Link tags"
    https://lwn.net/Articles/1037069/

[2] https://lwn.net/Articles/1038003/

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Spelling s/mulit/multi/, s/currenly/currently/

[Sudeep Holla]

On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 10:53:27AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Sudeep,
> 
> On Mon, 9 Mar 2026 at 10:38, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 09:29:29AM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 09:16:29AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > BTW, I noticed some of your commits use the non-standard
> > > > "Message-Id:"-tag, while others use the standard "Link:"-tag (albeit
> > > > with the lore.kernel.org instead of the recommended patch.msgid.link
> > > > domain) to record the origin of patches.  Do you have different git
> > > > setups on different machines?
> > >
> > > Not really. I used to use "Link:" and switched to "Message-Id" a while ago.
> > > I use only one setup and if you are observing something like above, I am
> > > doing something different. I need to check what is that, but the intention
> > > is to use "Message-Id". Let me have a look.
> >
> > OK, did a quick check and see last time I used "Link:" was an year ago and
> > that's when I saw some discussions about use of "Link:" for other purposes and
> > switched to "Message-Id". Let me know if I am messing up something still,
> > happy to look into it and fix it up.
> 
> There was indeed a fuzz about the Link:-tag[1].  In the end,
> it was agreed that the Link:-tags are fine, but please use the
> patch.msgid.link domain, to distinguish it from discussions (which
> should use lore.kernel.org).  Unfortunately I can't find a link to that
> (too many trees in the Google forest).
> 

Ah OK, I didn't follow up to the conclusion of that discussion for sure.

> About Message-Id: I totally agree with [2] ;-)
> 

Thanks, at least the setup is working as expected though it is not using
more common "Link:" format.

> Thanks!
> 
> [1] "A policy for Link tags"
>     https://lwn.net/Articles/1037069/
> 
> [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/1038003/
> 

Thanks for the pointers. Much appreciated! I will use "Message-Id" for this
(v7.1 cycle) and switch to Link as per the above format later as I see that
is more common than "Message-Id" in v7.0 cycle. I don't want to fix-up now 😄.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep