Re: [V2][PATCH] atm: horizon: Fix spelling mistakes in TX comment

[Jun Miao]

On 8/8/21 12:58 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> [Please note: This e-mail is from an EXTERNAL e-mail address]
>
> On Sat, 2021-08-07 at 23:38 +0800, Jun Miao wrote:
> > It's "must not", not "musn't", meaning "shall not".
> > Let's fix that.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Jun Miao <jun.miao@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/atm/horizon.c | 6 +++---
> >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/atm/horizon.c b/drivers/atm/horizon.c
> > index 4f2951cbe69c..9ee494bc5c51 100644
> > --- a/drivers/atm/horizon.c
> > +++ b/drivers/atm/horizon.c
> > @@ -2167,10 +2167,10 @@ static int hrz_open (struct atm_vcc *atm_vcc)
> >
> >
> >     // Part of the job is done by atm_pcr_goal which gives us a PCR
> >     // specification which says: EITHER grab the maximum available PCR
> > -  // (and perhaps a lower bound which we musn't pass), OR grab this
> > +  // (and perhaps a lower bound which we mustn't pass), OR grab this
> I meant to suggest you change the patch to use "must not" not
> the commit message.

Please ignore this e-mail. Sorry, confuse the mailing list.

I am so careless to forget change there. After this 2 minutest, i send 
new  same V2(in fact should v3 but forgive for a freshman)

> >     // amount, rounding down if you have to (and perhaps a lower bound
> > -  // which we musn't pass) OR grab this amount, rounding up if you
> > -  // have to (and perhaps an upper bound which we musn't pass). If any
> > +  // which we mustn't pass) OR grab this amount, rounding up if you
> > +  // have to (and perhaps an upper bound which we mustn't pass). If any
> >     // bounds ARE passed we fail. Note that rounding is only rounding to
> >     // match device limitations, we do not round down to satisfy
> >     // bandwidth availability even if this would not violate any given