On Mon 14-04-25 07:07:57, Cabbaken Q wrote: > From 46fab5ecc860f26f790bec2a902a54bae58dfca7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Ruoyu Qiu <cabbaken@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 14:56:28 +0800 > Subject: [PATCH] Fix comment style of `do_execveat_common()` > > Signed-off-by: Ruoyu Qiu <cabbaken@xxxxxxxxxxx> Thanks for the patch but I think fixing one extra space in a comment isn't really worth the effort of all the people involved in handling a patch. Honza > --- > fs/exec.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c > index 8e4ea5f1e64c..51dad7af5083 100644 > --- a/fs/exec.c > +++ b/fs/exec.c > @@ -1903,7 +1903,7 @@ static int do_execveat_common(int fd, struct filename *filename, > /* > * We move the actual failure in case of RLIMIT_NPROC excess from > * set*uid() to execve() because too many poorly written programs > - * don't check setuid() return code. Here we additionally recheck > + * don't check setuid() return code. Here we additionally recheck > * whether NPROC limit is still exceeded. > */ > if ((current->flags & PF_NPROC_EXCEEDED) && > -- > 2.49.0 > > -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR
