Re: [PATCH] Arm: constrain {,u}int64_aligned_t in public header

[Bertrand Marquis <Bertrand.Marquis@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Jan,

> On 4 Sep 2023, at 17:20, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On 04.09.2023 16:05, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>>> On 4 Sep 2023, at 16:01, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 04.09.2023 15:42, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>>>>> On 1 Sep 2023, at 09:26, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> This using a GNU extension, it may not be exposed in general, just like
>>>> 
>>>> Nit: Missing "is"
>>> 
>>> I would guess you would want it added as the 2nd word of the sentence. If
>>> not, please clarify where you think it is missing. If so, then I'm afraid
>>> I can't parse the sentence anymore with it added (i.e. there would need
>>> to be further modifications, e.g. at the very least "so" after the first
>>> comma).
>> 
>> Sorry yes, it should be "This is using a GNU".
> 
> So as I inferred, yet as said - according to my reading the sentence then
> ends up broken. If you continue to think the sentence is wrong as is, would
> it help if I replaced "This" by "For"?

The sentence looks a bit weird to me but I am not a native english speaker.
Any reformulation coming from me will probably not be good english anyway.
I understand that one as "we don't want to expose this in general because
it is a using a GNU extension and x86 is already not", the sentence here is
just asking me a bit more thinking that is it.

As this was a Nit, feel free to ignore and you can keep my R-b.

Cheers
Bertrand

> 
> Jan
> 
>>>>> is done on x86. External consumers need to make this type available up
>>>>> front (just like we expect {,u}int<N>_t to be supplied) - unlike on x86
>>>>> the type is actually needed outside of tools-only interfaces, because
>>>>> guest handle definitions use it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> While there also add underscores around "aligned".
>>>>> 
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>>>> 
>>>> With the Nit fixed (can be done on commit):
>>>> 
>>>> Reviewed-by: Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marquis@xxxxxxx>
>>> 
>>> Thanks, but I'm afraid I can't take it before the above is clarified.
>> 
>> Please see above.
>> 
>> Bertrand
>> 
>>> 
>>> Jan