Re: [virtio-comment] [PATCH 3/3] virtio-crypto: fix missing verb

[GaÃtan Harter <gaetan.harter@opensynergy.com>]

On 27.07.21 15:49, Cornelia Huck wrote

> On Mon, Jul 26 2021, Gaetan Harter <gaetan.harter@opensynergy.com> wrote:
> > The condition was incomplete "guarantee the size IS within the max_len".
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gaetan Harter <gaetan.harter@opensynergy.com>
> > ---
> >   virtio-crypto.tex | 6 +++---
> >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/virtio-crypto.tex b/virtio-crypto.tex
> > index 4a15e14..0d1d832 100644
> > --- a/virtio-crypto.tex
> > +++ b/virtio-crypto.tex
> > @@ -275,13 +275,13 @@ \subsection{Device configuration layout}\label{sec:Device Types / Crypto Device
> >   \item The driver MUST read the detailed algorithms fields based on \field{crypto_services} field.
> >   \item The driver SHOULD read \field{max_size} to discover the maximum size of the variable-length
> >       parameters of data operation of the crypto request's content the device supports and MUST
> > -    guarantee the size of each crypto request's content within the \field{max_size}, otherwise
> > +    guarantee the size of each crypto request's content is within the \field{max_size}, otherwise
> >       the request will fail and the driver MUST reset the device.
> >   \item The driver SHOULD read \field{max_cipher_key_len} to discover the maximum length of cipher key
> > -    the device supports and MUST guarantee the \field{key_len} (CIPHER service or AEAD service) within
> > +    the device supports and MUST guarantee the \field{key_len} (CIPHER service or AEAD service) is within
> >       the \field{max_cipher_key_len} of the device configuration, otherwise the request will fail.
> >   \item The driver SHOULD read \field{max_auth_key_len} to discover the maximum length of authenticated
> > -    key the device supports and MUST guarantee the \field{auth_key_len} (MAC service) within the
> > +    key the device supports and MUST guarantee the \field{auth_key_len} (MAC service) is within the
> >       \field{max_auth_key_len} of the device configuration, otherwise the request will fail.
> >   \end{itemize*}
> This still seems a bit awkward. I'd make that either "MUST guarantee
> (...) to be within (...)", or "MUST guarantee that (...) is within
> (...)". What do you think?
> auie

I agree

From a non native English speaker, I think I prefer your second version based on
the current text.  I read the sentence as an active process "read to discover,
and guarantee, otherwise the request will fail" and it is easier for me.
Where I feel the first one, with "to be" to be more a static.

I will send an updated version.

Thank you.

Best regards

--
GaÃtan


Please mind our privacy notice<https://www.opensynergy.com/datenschutzerklaerung/privacy-notice-for-business-partners-pursuant-to-article-13-of-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/> pursuant to Art. 13 GDPR. // Unsere Hinweise zum Datenschutz gem. Art. 13 DSGVO finden Sie hier.<https://www.opensynergy.com/de/datenschutzerklaerung/datenschutzhinweise-fuer-geschaeftspartner-gem-art-13-dsgvo/>