Re: [PATCH v6 21/21] Documentation/x86: Add documentation for TDX host support

[Dave Hansen]

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_.