Re: [PATCH] fs: Fix typo from smpfs to smbfs in filesystem documentation

[Jonathan Corbet]

Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 02:41:29AM +0800, kth wrote:
>> The documentation incorrectly referred to 'smbfs' as 'smpfs'. This change corrects that typo to ensure the documentation is accurate and not misleading.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Kang Taeho <kangtaeho2456@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/admin-guide/highuid.rst | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/highuid.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/highuid.rst
>> index 6ee70465c0ea..9239067563a1 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/highuid.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/highuid.rst
>> @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ What's left to be done for 32-bit UIDs on all Linux architectures:
>>  
>>    Other filesystems have not been checked yet.
>>  
>> -- The ncpfs and smpfs filesystems cannot presently use 32-bit UIDs in
>> +- The ncpfs and smbfs filesystems cannot presently use 32-bit UIDs in
>
> ncpfs doesn't exist any more; it was removed many years ago.  And the
> smbfs that is referred to here was replaced by cifs many years ago.
>
> I have a feeling the entire highuid document should be deleted.  It
> describes a transition that happened 25 years ago.

That seems like the right thing to do - it's essentially somebody's
"todo" list from 2000, which lacks relevance now.

Kang, would you like to submit a patch to simply remove the file
instead?

Thanks,

jon