[PATCH] Documentation/PCI: fix spelling mistake in boot-interrupts

[PATCH] Documentation/PCI: fix spelling mistake in boot-interrupts

[attreyee-muk]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 937 bytes --]

Correct to “re-enabled” from “reenabled”.

Signed-off-by: Attreyee Mukherjee <tintinm2017@gmail.com>
---
 Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst b/Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst
index 2ec70121bfca..931077bb0953 100644
--- a/Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst
+++ b/Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ Conditions
 ==========
 
 The use of threaded interrupts is the most likely condition to trigger
-this problem today. Threaded interrupts may not be reenabled after the IRQ
+this problem today. Threaded interrupts may not be re-enabled after the IRQ
 handler wakes. These "one shot" conditions mean that the threaded interrupt
 needs to keep the interrupt line masked until the threaded handler has run.
 Especially when dealing with high data rate interrupts, the thread needs to
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/PCI: fix spelling mistake in boot-interrupts

[Randy Dunlap]

Hi,

On 12/23/23 10:44, attreyee-muk wrote:
> Correct to “re-enabled” from “reenabled”.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Attreyee Mukherjee <tintinm2017@gmail.com>

Is "reenabled" confusing? I don't have a problem with it, but
one web page [1] says that it's OK to use "re-" if not having
the hyphen can be confusing.

[1] https://www.grammarbook.com/blog/hyphens/hyphens-with-the-prefix-re/

OTOH, some web sites say the "reenable" is OK, at least as an
alternative spelling.

Thanks.

> ---
>  Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst b/Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst
> index 2ec70121bfca..931077bb0953 100644
> --- a/Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst
> @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ Conditions
>  ==========
>  
>  The use of threaded interrupts is the most likely condition to trigger
> -this problem today. Threaded interrupts may not be reenabled after the IRQ
> +this problem today. Threaded interrupts may not be re-enabled after the IRQ
>  handler wakes. These "one shot" conditions mean that the threaded interrupt
>  needs to keep the interrupt line masked until the threaded handler has run.
>  Especially when dealing with high data rate interrupts, the thread needs to

-- 
#Randy
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
https://subspace.kernel.org/etiquette.html

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/PCI: fix spelling mistake in boot-interrupts

[Jonathan Corbet]

Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> writes:

> Hi,
>
> On 12/23/23 10:44, attreyee-muk wrote:
>> Correct to “re-enabled” from “reenabled”.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Attreyee Mukherjee <tintinm2017@gmail.com>
>
> Is "reenabled" confusing? I don't have a problem with it, but
> one web page [1] says that it's OK to use "re-" if not having
> the hyphen can be confusing.
>
> [1] https://www.grammarbook.com/blog/hyphens/hyphens-with-the-prefix-re/
>
> OTOH, some web sites say the "reenable" is OK, at least as an
> alternative spelling.

Either is probably fine; so I'm not quite sure why this is worth
changing?

Thanks,

jon

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/PCI: fix spelling mistake in boot-interrupts

[Bjorn Helgaas]

[+cc Randy]

On Sun, Dec 24, 2023 at 12:14:13AM +0530, attreyee-muk wrote:
> Correct to “re-enabled” from “reenabled”.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Attreyee Mukherjee <tintinm2017@gmail.com>

I'm fine with this either way, so I squashed this together with the
"busses" patch and they're both on pci/misc for v6.8.

> ---
>  Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst b/Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst
> index 2ec70121bfca..931077bb0953 100644
> --- a/Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/PCI/boot-interrupts.rst
> @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ Conditions
>  ==========
>  
>  The use of threaded interrupts is the most likely condition to trigger
> -this problem today. Threaded interrupts may not be reenabled after the IRQ
> +this problem today. Threaded interrupts may not be re-enabled after the IRQ
>  handler wakes. These "one shot" conditions mean that the threaded interrupt
>  needs to keep the interrupt line masked until the threaded handler has run.
>  Especially when dealing with high data rate interrupts, the thread needs to
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>