> +Also note that the division and modulo operations are unsigned. > +Thus, for `BPF_ALU`, 'imm' is first converted to an unsigned > +32-bit value, whereas for `BPF_ALU64`, 'imm' is first sign extended > +to 64 bits and then converted to an unsigned 64-bit value. There > +are no instructions for signed division or modulo. English is not my native language, but I think "converted" may be too generic for this paragraph: are the same bits reinterpreted as unsigned? Or an actual conversion like absolute value is performed? Wouldn't it be better to say "interpreted as" instead of "converted to" in this case? Something like this: "Also note that the division and modulo operations are unsigned. Thus, for `BPF_ALU`, 'imm' is interpreted as an unsigned 32-bit value, whereas for `BPF_ALU64`, 'imm' is first sign extended to 64 bits and the result interpreted as an unsigned 64-bit value. There are no instructions for signed division or modulo."
