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@gmail.com>
---
 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
   all ioctl()s. Some new ioctl()s have been added with 32-bit UIDs, but
   more are needed. (as well as new user<->kernel data structures)
 
-- 
2.48.1

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@gmail.com>
> ---
>  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.

Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> 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@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  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