Re: [PATCH] kernel/hung_task.c: Fix a typo in check_hung_task() comment

[Lukas Bulwahn]

On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 1:41 PM Jun Miao <jun.miao@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> It's "mustn't", not "musn't". Let's fix that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jun Miao <jun.miao@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  kernel/hung_task.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/hung_task.c b/kernel/hung_task.c
> index 9888e2bc8c76..ea5ba912db06 100644
> --- a/kernel/hung_task.c
> +++ b/kernel/hung_task.c
> @@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ static void check_hung_task(struct task_struct *t, unsigned long timeout)
>         /*
>          * When a freshly created task is scheduled once, changes its state to
>          * TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE without having ever been switched out once, it
> -        * musn't be checked.
> +        * mustn't be checked.

I cannot even parse this comment.

Does "When a freshly created task is scheduled once, changes its state
to TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE" mean "When a freshly created task is
scheduled once and it changes its state to TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE"?

Does this "it must not be checked" read as "it shall not be checked"
(as in "because if you check it, something goes wrong") or "it is not
required to be checked" (as in "usually, you need to check it
(otherwise something goes wrong), but here in this case, you do not
need to check it, because it cannot go wrong in this case")?

Fixing spelling mistakes is okay, but it is even better to check the
sentence you are correcting and try to comprehend it.

Lukas