Re: [PATCH] doc: Fix some typo errors in ras.rst

[Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>]

On 5/5/20 11:32 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Tue,  5 May 2020 11:10:49 -0400
> Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Fix typo errors.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>   Documentation/admin-guide/ras.rst | 8 ++++----
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/ras.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/ras.rst
>> index 0310db624964..8b1803b2606f 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/ras.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/ras.rst
>> @@ -156,10 +156,10 @@ the labels provided by the BIOS won't match the real ones.
>>   ECC memory
>>   ----------
>>   
>> -As mentioned on the previous section, ECC memory has extra bits to be
>> -used for error correction. So, on 64 bit systems, a memory module
>> -has 64 bits of *data width*, and 74 bits of *total width*. So, there are
>> -8 bits extra bits to be used for the error detection and correction
>> +As mentioned on the previous section, ECC memory has extra bits to
>> +be used for error correction. So, on 64 bit systems, a memory module
>> +has 64 bits of *data width*, and 72 bits of *total width*. So, there
>> +are 8 extra bits to be used for the error detection and correction
>>   mechanisms. Those extra bits are called *syndrome*\ [#f1]_\ [#f2]_.
> So I had to work to figure out what the change was, since you didn't say
> in the changelog and you refilled the paragraph.  But this looks like a
> *factual* error, giving the wrong number of bits, right?  It seems like
> the changelog should say that.  Do the people who know about this stuff
> agree that the change is correct?
>
> Thanks,
>
> jon
>
Yes, I change 74 bits to 72 bits and remove an extra "bits". Will send 
out v2 to clarify that.

Thanks,
Longman