From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161228AbWGIXzI (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Jul 2006 19:55:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161233AbWGIXzI (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Jul 2006 19:55:08 -0400 Received: from ns2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:60589 "EHLO mx2.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161231AbWGIXzH (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Jul 2006 19:55:07 -0400 From: Andi Kleen To: "Adam Henley" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc1 1/1] arch/x86-64: A few trivial spelling and grammar fixes Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 01:52:32 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org, trivial@kernel.org References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200607100152.32389.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 08 July 2006 19:27, Adam Henley wrote: > A few trivial spelling and grammar mistakes picked up in > "arch/x86_64/aperture.c", "arch/x86_64/crash.c" and > "arch/x86_64/apic.c". I think all are correct fixes but am ever aware > of my fallibility :o) This is my first patch submission so all > feedback is appreciated, esp. Applied thanks. > WRT CCing to Linus, Andi and > trivial@kernel.org, is this correct? Me would have been enough in this case when there is an active maintainer. > And which is the most appropriate > kernel version to diff against? If any. 2.6.18rc1 is fine -Andi