Re: [PATCH] iommu: Spelling s/KConfig/Kconfig/

[Robin Murphy]

On 2025-02-19 2:48 pm, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Fix two misspellings of "Kconfig".

Honestly after 6 years and no obvious complaints I'd be inclined to just 
drop those two paragraphs referring to v4.x kernel behaviour, or indeed 
maybe make a move on the aforementioned removal of the whole thing....

Otherwise, frankly when the same thing is referred to 4 different ways 
in the space of 6 sentences - "this Kconfig", "this config", "this 
option", "This Kconfig option", "this config" - I would argue that 
capitalisation is not the biggest issue with this text ;)

Thanks,
Robin.

> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>   drivers/iommu/Kconfig | 4 ++--
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/Kconfig b/drivers/iommu/Kconfig
> index 6cfd1b5b6e07f038..6c46e1d58987cd11 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/Kconfig
> @@ -348,14 +348,14 @@ config ARM_SMMU_DISABLE_BYPASS_BY_DEFAULT
>   	  an iommu domain will report an abort back to the device and
>   	  will not be allowed to pass through the SMMU.
>   
> -	  Any old kernels that existed before this KConfig was
> +	  Any old kernels that existed before this Kconfig was
>   	  introduced would default to _allowing_ bypass (AKA the
>   	  equivalent of NO for this config).  However the default for
>   	  this option is YES because the old behavior is insecure.
>   
>   	  There are few reasons to allow unmatched stream bypass, and
>   	  even fewer good ones.  If saying YES here breaks your board
> -	  you should work on fixing your board.  This KConfig option
> +	  you should work on fixing your board.  This Kconfig option
>   	  is expected to be removed in the future and we'll simply
>   	  hardcode the bypass disable in the code.
>