From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on archive.lwn.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.0 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by archive.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C5367D089 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 08:20:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729160AbeKFRoU (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2018 12:44:20 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:53882 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728133AbeKFRoU (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2018 12:44:20 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id wA68EBOh044490 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 03:20:17 -0500 Received: from e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.98]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2nk5t6bc6h-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 06 Nov 2018 03:20:16 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 08:20:15 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.194) by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.132) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Tue, 6 Nov 2018 08:20:13 -0000 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id wA68KC5H50200648 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 6 Nov 2018 08:20:12 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31B7B42042; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 08:20:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 926874204D; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 08:20:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rapoport-lnx (unknown [9.148.204.36]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 08:20:11 +0000 (GMT) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 10:20:09 +0200 From: Mike Rapoport To: Randy Dunlap Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Jonathan Corbet , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Mike Rapoport Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs/admin-guide/mm/concepts.rst: grammar fixups References: <1541447895-14996-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.ibm.com> <20181105211240.GA3074@bombadil.infradead.org> <20181106063511.GC4499@rapoport-lnx> <19eb9ca8-d285-3ea9-faa5-f996a462f138@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <19eb9ca8-d285-3ea9-faa5-f996a462f138@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18110608-0008-0000-0000-0000028BF1F9 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18110608-0009-0000-0000-000021F62A57 Message-Id: <20181106082009.GA28505@rapoport-lnx> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-11-06_03:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1811060074 Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 11:29:27PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 11/5/18 10:35 PM, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 01:12:40PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 09:58:15PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote: > >>> @@ -21,10 +21,10 @@ Virtual Memory Primer > >>> The physical memory in a computer system is a limited resource and > >>> even for systems that support memory hotplug there is a hard limit on > >>> the amount of memory that can be installed. The physical memory is not > >>> -necessary contiguous, it might be accessible as a set of distinct > >>> +necessary contiguous; it might be accessible as a set of distinct > >> > >> necessarily > >> > >>> address ranges. Besides, different CPU architectures, and even > >>> -different implementations of the same architecture have different view > >>> -how these address ranges defined. > >>> +different implementations of the same architecture have different views > >>> +of how these address ranges defined. > >> > >> "are defined"? > >> > >>> Each physical memory page can be mapped as one or more virtual > >>> pages. These mappings are described by page tables that allow > >>> -translation from virtual address used by programs to real address in > >>> -the physical memory. The page tables organized hierarchically. > >>> +translation from a virtual address used by programs to the real > >>> +address in the physical memory. The page tables are organized > >>> +hierarchically. > >> > >> I don't like the term "real address". Can we say "physical address in memory" here, or "address of physical memory" or something? > > > > I didn't really like it as well, but I couldn't think of any better > > adjective to emphasize that address in the physical memory is "the real > > thing". > > > > Maybe the best would be to drop "real" and make it > > > > "translation from a virtual address used by programs to the > > address in the physical memory" > > physical memory address ? Works for me, thanks! > > -- > ~Randy > -- Sincerely yours, Mike.