From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0ED6C0650E for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 13:12:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 807AF20881 for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 13:12:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=bfs.de header.i=@bfs.de header.b="0V0eoBZL" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729087AbfGANMy (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jul 2019 09:12:54 -0400 Received: from mx01-fr.bfs.de ([193.174.231.67]:60889 "EHLO mx01-fr.bfs.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726329AbfGANMy (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jul 2019 09:12:54 -0400 Received: from mail-fr.bfs.de (mail-fr.bfs.de [10.177.18.200]) by mx01-fr.bfs.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67D032035D; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 15:12:47 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bfs.de; s=dkim201901; t=1561986767; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=9t9pBivaBS8etNTZ6qCGnieNPfZCLTos1wsuQiVM89M=; b=0V0eoBZL9Eb2zvugOYhC+QpYytevRxSId7mkpgf9xAUlUsTez+6ox6KH7i/87bPBx8R0q7 6r/JWqkcDCk8hUL/wYJnmRHa1laeapmE57UABwudzarRgBWNqB2+PHavOq1Rb7b2SvjWyE IphI/XmIKwLPcXHdkibnGBqb9dweIx8d9DlrVmUYojWxOzmnrDXYoVu9xW86R8/A4SSvpp PSd+RoPPz5kjahiiLCLo6gapt9dZiP6dgF35b1iSgaZjvH9EkGPaJ7/LpL0SwaGmm3WDlP yHLz840yit2QYCvxxH01LE1BtVfy9t5+I0QioFAauRAnwI0pE94nmfC4WNxRZg== Received: from [134.92.181.33] (unknown [134.92.181.33]) by mail-fr.bfs.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3CF7BEEBD; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 15:12:46 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5D1A06CE.6000405@bfs.de> Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2019 15:12:46 +0200 From: walter harms Reply-To: wharms@bfs.de User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; de; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125 SUSE/3.0.11 Thunderbird/3.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Colin King CC: Shuah Khan , Andy Lutomirski , Kees Cook , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] selftests/x86: fix spelling mistake "FAILT" -> "FAIL" References: <20190701130431.13391-1-colin.king@canonical.com> In-Reply-To: <20190701130431.13391-1-colin.king@canonical.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Authentication-Results: mx01-fr.bfs.de X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.10 / 7.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.00)[wharms@bfs.de]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; REPLYTO_ADDR_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[8]; NEURAL_HAM(-0.00)[-0.999,0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] Sender: linux-kselftest-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Am 01.07.2019 15:04, schrieb Colin King: > From: Colin Ian King > > There is an spelling mistake in an a test error message. Fix it. > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King > --- > tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_vsyscall.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_vsyscall.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_vsyscall.c > index 4602326b8f5b..a4f4d4cf22c3 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_vsyscall.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_vsyscall.c > @@ -451,7 +451,7 @@ static int test_vsys_x(void) > printf("[OK]\tExecuting the vsyscall page failed: #PF(0x%lx)\n", > segv_err); > } else { > - printf("[FAILT]\tExecution failed with the wrong error: #PF(0x%lx)\n", > + printf("[FAIL]\tExecution failed with the wrong error: #PF(0x%lx)\n", > segv_err); > return 1; > } "wrong error" sounds like scratching table, perhaps "error" is here sufficient ? Bomus points when user is expected to report this. re, wh