On 10/28/22 05:52, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > -architecture doesn't require the BIOS to load the TDX module, but the > -kernel assumes it is loaded by the BIOS. > +architecture doesn't require the BIOS to load the TDX module, however the > +kernel assumes that it is loaded by the BIOS. Hi Bagas, I just read the first hunk of your suggestions. What Kai had was fine. There's no reason to change "but" to "however". Both are, to my eye, perfectly fine. I appreciate that these suggestions are trying to improve things. But, I don't think they're an appreciable improvement. OK, I lied. I went and read one more random hunk: > -Currently the kernel doesn't handle hot-removal of convertible memory but > -depends on the BIOS to behave correctly. > +Currently the kernel that hot-removal but assumes that BIOS behaves > +correctly. This turns a perfectly good sentence into gibberish. It makes Kai's documentation demonstrably worse. To make matters worse, it's mixed in with those arbitrary changes like but->however to make it harder to find. Please stop sending these patches. They're not helping. In fact, they are consuming reviewer and contributor time, so they're actually making the situation _worse_.
