From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9E82A053E for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 21:22:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D34C01BF91; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 21:22:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: by dpdk.org (Postfix, from userid 1017) id 292551BFE0; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 21:21:52 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <20200727192015.26418-6-stephen@networkplumber.org> References: <20200727192015.26418-6-stephen@networkplumber.org> To: test-report@dpdk.org Cc: Stephen Hemminger Message-Id: <20200727192152.292551BFE0@dpdk.org> Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 21:21:52 +0200 (CEST) From: checkpatch@dpdk.org Subject: [dpdk-test-report] |WARNING| pw74876 [PATCH 20.08 5/6] rte_ethdev: change comment to rte_dev_eth_mac_addr_add X-BeenThere: test-report@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: automatic DPDK test reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: test-report-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "test-report" Test-Label: checkpatch Test-Status: WARNING http://dpdk.org/patch/74876 _coding style issues_ WARNING:TYPO_SPELLING: 'whitelist' may be misspelled - perhaps 'allowlist'? #81: The comment used the term whitelist and was awkardly written. total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 9 lines checked