linux-kernel - [PATCH] Documentation/devicetree: Fixing a typo in usuage-model.rst

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250517144020.870706-1-hsukrut3@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 16:40:20 +0200
From: Sukrut Heroorkar <hsukrut3@...il.com>
To: robh@...nel.org,
	krzk+dt@...nel.org,
	conor+dt@...nel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
	Sukrut Heroorkar <hsukrut3@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH] Documentation/devicetree: Fixing a typo in usuage-model.rst

Fixes a minor spelling issue by correcting "busses" to the correct plural form "buses".

Signed-off-by: Sukurt Heroorkar <hsukrut3@...il.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/usage-model.rst | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/usage-model.rst b/Documentation/devicetree/usage-model.rst
index 0717426856b2..6f9a2c0a380a 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/usage-model.rst
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/usage-model.rst
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ links from one node to another outside of the natural tree structure.
 
 Conceptually, a common set of usage conventions, called 'bindings',
 is defined for how data should appear in the tree to describe typical
-hardware characteristics including data busses, interrupt lines, GPIO
+hardware characteristics including data buses, interrupt lines, GPIO
 connections, and peripheral devices.
 
 As much as possible, hardware is described using existing bindings to
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ names are simply text strings, it is easy to extend existing bindings
 or create new ones by defining new nodes and properties.  Be wary,
 however, of creating a new binding without first doing some homework
 about what already exists.  There are currently two different,
-incompatible, bindings for i2c busses that came about because the new
+incompatible, bindings for i2c buses that came about because the new
 binding was created without first investigating how i2c devices were
 already being enumerated in existing systems.
 
-- 
2.43.0