Re: [PATCH 1/7] docs: rust: Fix a few grammatical errors

[John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>]

On 10/20/25 11:55 AM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> Fix two grammatical errors in the Rust coding guidelines document.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 

Reviewed-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>


thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard


> diff --git a/Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst b/Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst
> index 6ff9e754755d..d556f0db042b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst
> @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ should still be used. For instance:
>  	// TODO: ...
>  	fn f() {}
>  
> -One special kind of comments are the ``// SAFETY:`` comments. These must appear
> +One special kind of comment is the ``// SAFETY:`` comment. These must appear
>  before every ``unsafe`` block, and they explain why the code inside the block is
>  correct/sound, i.e. why it cannot trigger undefined behavior in any case, e.g.:
>  
> @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ in the kernel:
>  - While not shown here, if a function may panic, the conditions under which
>    that happens must be described under a ``# Panics`` section.
>  
> -  Please note that panicking should be very rare and used only with a good
> +  Please note that panicking should be very rare and used only for a good
>    reason. In almost all cases, a fallible approach should be used, typically
>    returning a ``Result``.
>