On Thu, Jul 06 2023, Parav Pandit <pa...@nvidia.com> wrote:
>> From: Cornelia Huck <coh...@redhat.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, July 6, 2023 12:28 PM
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 06 2023, Parav Pandit <pa...@nvidia.com> wrote:
>>
>> > diff --git a/transport-pci-legacy-regs.tex
>> > b/transport-pci-legacy-regs.tex new file mode 100644 index
>> > 0000000..ceea28c
>> > --- /dev/null
>> > +++ b/transport-pci-legacy-regs.tex
>> > @@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
>> > +\subsection{Legacy Interface: Group member device Configuration
>> > +Region Access}\label{sec:Virtio Transport Options / Virtio Over PCI
>> > +Bus / Legacy Interface: Group Member Device Configuration Region
>> > +Access}
>> > +
>> > +The PCI owner device or the member device or both support driver
>> > +notifications using
>>
>> What about
>>
>> "The PCI owner device, the member device, or both can choose to support..." ?
>>
> Fine too.
> Any thing wrong in having or as above, so I don't write it next time?
> Or that in current form reads better to me.
Just a bare "support" does not really tell the reader if this is
something that is required or optional. Dropping the first "or" makes it
read better for me.
>
>> > +a notification region defined in \field{struct
>> virtio_pci_legacy_notify_region}.
(...)
>> > +The group owner device or the group member device or both MAY support
>> > +driver notifications region.
>>
>> Make this "a driver notification region"?
>>
> Notifications are generally more than one and spec has the section "driver
> notifications", so...
I'd parse this as "a region for the purpose of notification" (and
"notification region" is used above)... but in any case, we need the
article here, I think.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
