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