On 2017-09-21 14:52, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>

Yes, this is trivial, both the patch and my complaint, but can you please
add a "body of explanation" as suggested by submitting-patches in its topic
"The canonical patch format"?

Maintainers accepting empty patch descriptions are publicly shamed, and
I do not wish to be in that boat, sorry...

Cheers,
Peter

> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-mux.txt | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-mux.txt 
> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-mux.txt
> index 212e6779dc5c0caf..b38f58a1c8784184 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-mux.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-mux.txt
> @@ -6,10 +6,10 @@ multiplexer/switch will have one child node for each child 
> bus.
>  
>  Optional properties:
>  - #address-cells = <1>;
> -   This property is required is the i2c-mux child node does not exist.
> +   This property is required if the i2c-mux child node does not exist.
>  
>  - #size-cells = <0>;
> -   This property is required is the i2c-mux child node does not exist.
> +   This property is required if the i2c-mux child node does not exist.
>  
>  - i2c-mux
>     For i2c multiplexers/switches that have child nodes that are a mixture
> 

Reply via email to