[PATCH] cpupower: repair mangled powercap comment

[PATCH] cpupower: repair mangled powercap comment

[Cryolitia PukNgae via B4 Relay]

From: Cryolitia PukNgae <cryolitia@uniontech.com>

The current comment exhibits clear patch application artifacts:
1. A stray '-' prefix indicating failed line removal
2. Broken sentence structure from improper context patching

What appears to be version control residue has persisted since its
initial introduction and through the 2022 kernel submission[1]. While
my archaeological efforts only trace back to the 2017 openSUSE patch[2],
the corrupted syntax suggests even older origins that remain elusive -
perhaps maintainers with longer institutional memory could shed light
on its provenance.

Restore grammatical sanity by:
- Removing the redundant second line with its leading '-'
- Preserving only the primary statement about RAPL hardcoding
- Eliminating the fragmented "should show up" clause

The result reflects reality without speculative future-proofing.

1. https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221123111810.16017-2-trenn@suse.de/
2. https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/535512

Signed-off-by: Cryolitia PukNgae <cryolitia@uniontech.com>
---
 tools/power/cpupower/lib/powercap.c | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/power/cpupower/lib/powercap.c b/tools/power/cpupower/lib/powercap.c
index 94a0c69e55ef5e4291b13a4218e706fa8d14e6a7..609943c829efce8045d97097b5f5e9ec86d0f519 100644
--- a/tools/power/cpupower/lib/powercap.c
+++ b/tools/power/cpupower/lib/powercap.c
@@ -87,8 +87,6 @@ int powercap_set_enabled(int mode)
 
 /*
  * Hardcoded, because rapl is the only powercap implementation
-- * this needs to get more generic if more powercap implementations
- * should show up
  */
 int powercap_get_driver(char *driver, int buflen)
 {

---
base-commit: 6bcdbd62bd56e6d7383f9e06d9d148935b3c9b73
change-id: 20250806-mangled_cpupower-5186789f8b2b

Best regards,
-- 
Cryolitia PukNgae <cryolitia@uniontech.com>

Re: [PATCH] cpupower: repair mangled powercap comment

[Shuah Khan]

On 8/6/25 01:08, Cryolitia PukNgae via B4 Relay wrote:
> From: Cryolitia PukNgae <cryolitia@uniontech.com>
> 
> The current comment exhibits clear patch application artifacts:
> 1. A stray '-' prefix indicating failed line removal
> 2. Broken sentence structure from improper context patching
> 
> What appears to be version control residue has persisted since its
> initial introduction and through the 2022 kernel submission[1]. While
> my archaeological efforts only trace back to the 2017 openSUSE patch[2],
> the corrupted syntax suggests even older origins that remain elusive -
> perhaps maintainers with longer institutional memory could shed light
> on its provenance.
> 
> Restore grammatical sanity by:
> - Removing the redundant second line with its leading '-'
> - Preserving only the primary statement about RAPL hardcoding
> - Eliminating the fragmented "should show up" clause
> 
> The result reflects reality without speculative future-proofing.
> 
> 1. https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221123111810.16017-2-trenn@suse.de/
> 2. https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/535512

Lots of information for a simple comment spacing change.
What are we fixing here? What happens if we don't fix it?

thanks,
-- Shuah

Re: [PATCH] cpupower: repair mangled powercap comment

[Cryolitia PukNgae]

On 07/08/2025 07.37, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 8/6/25 01:08, Cryolitia PukNgae via B4 Relay wrote:
>> From: Cryolitia PukNgae <cryolitia@uniontech.com>
>>
>> The current comment exhibits clear patch application artifacts:
>> 1. A stray '-' prefix indicating failed line removal
>> 2. Broken sentence structure from improper context patching
>>
>> What appears to be version control residue has persisted since its
>> initial introduction and through the 2022 kernel submission[1]. While
>> my archaeological efforts only trace back to the 2017 openSUSE patch[2],
>> the corrupted syntax suggests even older origins that remain elusive -
>> perhaps maintainers with longer institutional memory could shed light
>> on its provenance.
>>
>> Restore grammatical sanity by:
>> - Removing the redundant second line with its leading '-'
>> - Preserving only the primary statement about RAPL hardcoding
>> - Eliminating the fragmented "should show up" clause
>>
>> The result reflects reality without speculative future-proofing.
>>
>> 1. https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221123111810.16017-2-trenn@suse.de/
>> 2. https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/535512
>
> Lots of information for a simple comment spacing change.

The critical issue is the leading '-' in the comment, not just spacing. This is almost certainly a patch application artifact - likely from a more earlier source than the 2017 openSUSE patch.

> What are we fixing here? What happens if we don't fix it?

Nothing happens. The kernel will run as usual, but cleaner than leaving version control artifacts confusing future readers.

>
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
>