Fix a small typo in the kerneldoc comment of the INDIRECT_CALL_$NR
macro.

Signed-off-by: Tobias Klauser <tklauser@distanz.ch>
---
 include/linux/indirect_call_wrapper.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/indirect_call_wrapper.h b/include/linux/indirect_call_wrapper.h
index c1c76a70a6ce..adb83a42a6b9 100644
--- a/include/linux/indirect_call_wrapper.h
+++ b/include/linux/indirect_call_wrapper.h
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
  *  @__VA_ARGS__: arguments for @f
  *
  * Avoid retpoline overhead for known builtin, checking @f vs each of them and
- * eventually invoking directly the builtin function. The functions are check
+ * eventually invoking directly the builtin function. The functions are checked
  * in the given order. Fallback to the indirect call.
  */
 #define INDIRECT_CALL_1(f, f1, ...)					\
-- 
2.42.0

Hello:

This patch was applied to netdev/net-next.git (main)
by Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>:

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 11:42:02 +0100 you wrote:
> Fix a small typo in the kerneldoc comment of the INDIRECT_CALL_$NR
> macro.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tobias Klauser <tklauser@distanz.ch>
> ---
>  include/linux/indirect_call_wrapper.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Here is the summary with links:
  - [net-next] indirect_call_wrapper: Fix typo in INDIRECT_CALL_$NR kerneldoc
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/3185d57cfcd3

You are awesome, thank you!
-- 
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html

+ Jakub, Dave and Eric

On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 11:42:02AM +0100, Tobias Klauser wrote:
> Fix a small typo in the kerneldoc comment of the INDIRECT_CALL_$NR
> macro.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tobias Klauser <tklauser@distanz.ch>

Thanks Tobias,

I agree this is correct.

Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>


To the netdev maintainers: get_maintainer.pl doesn't seem to
know much about include/linux/indirect_call_wrapper.h.
Should that be fixed?

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 17:56:26 +0000 Simon Horman wrote:
> To the netdev maintainers: get_maintainer.pl doesn't seem to
> know much about include/linux/indirect_call_wrapper.h.
> Should that be fixed?

I'm curious how many of such files exist under include/linux.
Files which are not really networking specific but only tree
the changes ever went thru is netdev.. 
But yes, in the interest of "taking responsibility" we should
probably claim it.

On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 01:03:10AM -0500, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 17:56:26 +0000 Simon Horman wrote:
> > To the netdev maintainers: get_maintainer.pl doesn't seem to
> > know much about include/linux/indirect_call_wrapper.h.
> > Should that be fixed?
> 
> I'm curious how many of such files exist under include/linux.
> Files which are not really networking specific but only tree
> the changes ever went thru is netdev.. 
> But yes, in the interest of "taking responsibility" we should
> probably claim it.

Thanks, patch sent.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20231120-indirect_call_wrapper-maintainer-v1-1-0a6bb1f7363e@kernel.org/