Re: [PATCH 2/5] docs: fix repeated word 'that' across documentation

On Fri, May 08, 2026 at 10:40:49AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:

On 5/8/26 10:15 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:

quoted

On 5/8/26 10:37, Adrien Reynard wrote:

Missing commit log in all your patches - I don't patch 1/5 in
my Inbox.

quoted

Signed-off-by: Adrien Reynard <redacted>
---
  Documentation/RCU/rcu.rst                          | 2 +-
  Documentation/driver-api/driver-model/overview.rst | 2 +-
  Documentation/filesystems/netfs_library.rst        | 2 +-
  Documentation/trace/histogram-design.rst           | 2 +-
  Documentation/trace/histogram.rst                  | 2 +-
  5 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/rcu.rst b/Documentation/RCU/rcu.rst
index bf6617b330a7..320ad3292b75 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/rcu.rst
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/rcu.rst

@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ Frequently Asked Questions

    Just as with spinlocks, RCU readers are not permitted to
    block, switch to user-mode execution, or enter the idle loop.
    Therefore, as soon as a CPU is seen passing through any of these
-  three states, we know that that CPU has exited any previous RCU
+  three states, we know that CPU has exited any previous RCU

The original intent might have been to say, "that cpu", so adding
the missing comma after the first "that" or change "that" to "the"
would make sense.

Not a comma, please.
I don't see a problem with "that that," but "that the" could also be OK.

This CPU was already mentioned.  So if for whatever reason we cannnot
stomach "that that", then "that this" would be better than "that the".

I suppose that false positives from simple grammar checkers might be
sufficient reason, but in this brave new world of LLMs, shouldn't we
be hoping for better?  ;-)

						Thanx, Paul

quoted

quoted

    read-side critical sections.  So, if we remove an item from a
    linked list, and then wait until all CPUs have switched context,
    executed in user mode, or executed in the idle loop, we can

-- 
~Randy