diff mbox series

[v3,1/3] docs: i2c: i2c-topology: fix typo

Message ID 20220824083104.2267000-2-luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com
State Accepted
Commit 6292b4ba607de5bcf4ab0e57892a2f8068e6b997
Headers show
Series [v3,1/3] docs: i2c: i2c-topology: fix typo | expand

Commit Message

Luca Ceresoli Aug. 24, 2022, 8:31 a.m. UTC 
From: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com>

"intension" should have probably been "intention", however "intent" seems
even better.

Reported-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com>
Acked-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>

---

Changed in v3:
- moved as first patch (Bagas)

Changed in v2:
- this patch is new in v2
---
 Documentation/i2c/i2c-topology.rst | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/Documentation/i2c/i2c-topology.rst b/Documentation/i2c/i2c-topology.rst
index 7cb53819778e..c9ed3b4d6085 100644
--- a/Documentation/i2c/i2c-topology.rst
+++ b/Documentation/i2c/i2c-topology.rst
@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@  ML2. It is not safe to build arbitrary topologies with two (or more)
      I.e. the select-transfer-deselect transaction targeting e.g. device
      address 0x42 behind mux-one may be interleaved with a similar
      operation targeting device address 0x42 behind mux-two. The
-     intension with such a topology would in this hypothetical example
+     intent with such a topology would in this hypothetical example
      be that mux-one and mux-two should not be selected simultaneously,
      but mux-locked muxes do not guarantee that in all topologies.