It's "a hard_limit", not "an hard_limit".  Probably that was just a typo.

Signed-off-by: Martin Kletzander <mkletzan@redhat.com>
---
Pushed as trivial.

I was *so* tempted to write "Fix an typo in a article...".  I'm glad I was
because that made me triple check the commit message.  Otherwise I would have a
typo like that somewhere there.

 docs/formatdomain.html.in | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/docs/formatdomain.html.in b/docs/formatdomain.html.in
index 8bb6636ea9f9..22ef81052d6b 100644
--- a/docs/formatdomain.html.in
+++ b/docs/formatdomain.html.in
@@ -1085,7 +1085,7 @@
         of memory, which means a malicious guest allocating large amounts of
         locked memory could cause a denial-of-service attack on the host.
         Because of this, using this option is discouraged unless your workload
-        demands it; even then, it's highly recommended to set an
+        demands it; even then, it's highly recommended to set a
         <code>hard_limit</code> (see
         <a href="#elementsMemoryTuning">memory tuning</a>) on memory allocation
         suitable for the specific environment at the same time to mitigate
-- 
2.17.1

--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list