[PATCH 1/3] Documentation: RISC-V: Fix a typo in patch-acceptance

[Palmer Dabbelt]

On Tue, 20 Sep 2022 09:56:59 PDT (-0700), Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 07:01:37AM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>> I just stumbled on this when modifying the docs.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at rivosinc.com>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst b/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
>> index dfe0ac5624fb..5da6f9b273d6 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/riscv/patch-acceptance.rst
>> @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ their own custom extensions.  These custom extensions aren't required
>>  to go through any review or ratification process by the RISC-V
>>  Foundation.  To avoid the maintenance complexity and potential
>>  performance impact of adding kernel code for implementor-specific
>
> s/implementor/implementer no? Or is this an American spelling?

I actually have no idea.  The "or" spelling seemed odd to me, but it was 
spell checking correctly.  The internet seems to be split on whether or 
not it's actually a word, which probably means it's uncommon enough it's 
worth moving over.  I'll just tack it on as a patch as there's enough 
feedback to have a v2.

>
>> -RISC-V extensions, we'll only to accept patches for extensions that
>> +RISC-V extensions, we'll only accept patches for extensions that
>>  have been officially frozen or ratified by the RISC-V Foundation.
>>  (Implementors, may, of course, maintain their own Linux kernel trees
>>  containing code for any custom extensions that they wish.)
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-riscv mailing list
>> linux-riscv at lists.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv