The irq_domain documentation states that "Here the interrupt number loose all kind of correspondence to hardware interrupt numbers:...". It's clear from the context that the author means to use "loses" instead of "loose". To avoid future confusion, this change fixes the aforementioned wording. Signed-off-by: Raphael Norwitz <raphael.norwitz@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- Documentation/core-api/irq/irq-domain.rst | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documentation/core-api/irq/irq-domain.rst b/Documentation/core-api/irq/irq-domain.rst index 096db12..eba5e41 100644 --- a/Documentation/core-api/irq/irq-domain.rst +++ b/Documentation/core-api/irq/irq-domain.rst @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ such as GPIO controllers avoid reimplementing identical callback mechanisms as the IRQ core system by modelling their interrupt handlers as irqchips, i.e. in effect cascading interrupt controllers. -Here the interrupt number loose all kind of correspondence to +Here the interrupt number loses all kind of correspondence to hardware interrupt numbers: whereas in the past, IRQ numbers could be chosen so they matched the hardware IRQ line into the root interrupt controller (i.e. the component actually fireing the -- 2.9.3
