From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D30871DFD95; Wed, 12 Mar 2025 22:30:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741818645; cv=none; b=U31hUDmemfZLZdyPilKG8bc+WGi1lUur1aWKrzZMDmRHj0WEn0G2dVQVJ1ImpLEjd4nD0mvIYDqlhN29jFuQL0txhOrl1uhanOiL6DLCTEKP0mF/Tiw83FwqoJ2jxJeIo6wcmfhv01f5EKvaethugBpn9AKNkZWSRd+qFmp+ZPc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741818645; c=relaxed/simple; bh=/5u4xWileZI4BqZZkjltZzTrP6QsO0Oq0cGDX0v38VM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=LCc+QGewCie8IK2cFMKr3KCLJ47teT4qwAysAJYwYf9RVlIMVbf4GuooobdITsxmfJuKDpVBAr/ufyFxzd3D1Qx4EhPQd5jXXfvLYf8bDhJVG9BYOYBiG2ePLqV4xyylH1onuIaWgFbXnTqP51frCAt/IhDmQSb6wbk7cCYVn5o= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=pUS2Z/eU; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="pUS2Z/eU" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net D62B441063 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1741818643; bh=WmyI+FyclJmL6XgBE5kwSw0ma2aJx2vXptVQysOPWrc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=pUS2Z/eUsxgFSdn37S63JrojfPFKzjylkhN0jyn6yfpW8w9j7+vmNBycbnFPCPNd1 blX/cgDECRyrWXkwm0WCk2CmqrnjLDD8GJIrWpT5viJ1RUr2TFmZvZgzyrUrH+FVOH zt9IlrID2mmdfQBXnlXB+K4aRmeCnPaCIDNkm4sApCPZcDRtFc6zYWGqHpb673SouU xqTSQ2WlByD6f6RsnUf6i4wpLkgADUiVyUNTXv7hGrVr6/UvUTD5fUQHUrNH9VNBzJ dsNiTqcT5qxVSeIZyvsxEYj+drorkcMjGZPPoesez7Cb3ggPMN+MWvJw+5+Y+2BODz XvlqI9yV2V5Ng== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:4600:2da9::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D62B441063; Wed, 12 Mar 2025 22:30:42 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Matthew Wilcox , kth Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: Fix typo from smpfs to smbfs in filesystem documentation In-Reply-To: References: <20250310184129.328482-1-kangtaeho2456@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 16:30:42 -0600 Message-ID: <87wmctlw4t.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Matthew Wilcox 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 >> --- >> 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