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 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A4E6EE01EB for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 21:45:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Type:MIME-Version: Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=F9JRazt1XcPxIBi4ezj1dV5LBjiEeHbt/v/TTg13crs=; b=GOOC6fPo+orIcYYRI5NBYJBoWg JVHlLxEvd8SfpAavvwUg/CnZY0ZYbOXRi3PsNx32cBrkpAGR6mF1TmI9OqnLXcmkR2a/m3hWjbeMN o+WCmeK13ZZldwx0F6s2nlK8xvZqL/xkleihNN+l3EJnsGXsaFR73KJm8KLpmTN4OHdghlFcO58BD 4z8NX46m8xn+GwSvx53i0vW9tXCKrDpKLrjldr1526z6mgQrx5GiJSjh/zYxc9IMFxc+OYux31qdF q4+HxS3OnMjGcgoHlPsltoP9pu+Fip/XV1UQ/9ul1SCs8EMA1FhpYyhT5UA9gGRfAO8mJSnqz2wiP DQq+tLIA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1so8gA-00000007EMS-0vEM; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 21:45:42 +0000 Received: from ms.lwn.net ([45.79.88.28]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1so8g6-00000007EM0-3nw2 for linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 21:45:40 +0000 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 9BA554188E DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1726004735; bh=F9JRazt1XcPxIBi4ezj1dV5LBjiEeHbt/v/TTg13crs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=SLjTh1qf1DQ1TSqjPe4hXo7/rORNZ8+0s+ilj2cAifj3n6GtQh/+i+mZuu3cDWSXn gi91mMWq3A2eQQsB4FmtW2hciDc5FhuQPmuLEpyaEfV8o8Knh4JlSXNV2iMEQNLaAv nnOF0N5aBcpyMPGXlKA9EYW9LI5QSTHaJD+C2pounFtsSRaYlpKrvgSBSEEBb1s+Xb 5dy3CyqTAg1zWu1245UzH+ZeUA/JOh0PfWUIyBNAgy/0wagHW68YYRxObDLe5rQV3X yMf/4NPXkxQpXcG5kEONXzi5KsmztLWeQx9VhfukytwjJbgZNho7zNv9D6lT8V6Myj WvZm506Pwr1sA== Received: from localhost (mdns.lwn.net [45.79.72.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9BA554188E; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 21:45:35 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Shivam Chaudhary , kbusch@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk Cc: hch@lst.de, sagi@grimberg.me, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cvam Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Remove duplicate "and" in 'Linux NVMe docs. In-Reply-To: <20240910052737.30579-1-cvam0000@gmail.com> References: <8734m8h9ce.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> <20240910052737.30579-1-cvam0000@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 15:45:34 -0600 Message-ID: <87o74v5gjl.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240910_144538_967221_7F008668 X-CRM114-Status: UNSURE ( 8.71 ) X-CRM114-Notice: Please train this message. X-BeenThere: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "Linux-nvme" Errors-To: linux-nvme-bounces+linux-nvme=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Shivam Chaudhary writes: > From: cvam > > Remove duplicate occurrence of 'and' in > 'Linux NVMe Feature and Quirk Policy' title heading. > > tested: Not breaking anything. > > Signed-off-by: Shivam Chaudhary > --- > Documentation/nvme/feature-and-quirk-policy.rst | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) I have applied this, thanks. For future reference, a remark like "tested: not breaking anything" is not helpful. If you have done testing, reviewers will want to know *how* you have tested it. For a patch like this, of course, that doesn't matter. jon