Re: [PATCH v39 1/7] Documentation/firmware: add imx/se to other_interfaces

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] Grammatical and phrasing errors in the newly added documentation.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v39 1/7] Documentation/firmware: add imx/se to other_interfaces ---
commit fe039b37299ef0c736ad2dd27910cd638e874b3d
Author: Pankaj Gupta <[email protected]>

Documentation/firmware: add imx/se to other_interfaces

This commit documents the i.MX SoC Service layer and C_DEV driver for
selected SoCs that contain NXP hardware IPs for Secure Enclaves.

> diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/firmware/other_interfaces.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/firmware/other_interfaces.rst
> index 06ac89adaafba..6c6fa9a0ba1df 100644
> --- a/Documentation/driver-api/firmware/other_interfaces.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/driver-api/firmware/other_interfaces.rst
[ ... ]
> +Introduction
> +------------
> +The NXP's i.MX HW IP like EdgeLock Enclave, V2X etc., creates an embedded secure

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but could the phrasing here be adjusted? For example,
using "NXP i.MX hardware IPs" might read a bit more naturally than
"The NXP's i.MX HW IP".

> +enclave within the SoC boundary to enable features like:
> +
> +- Hardware Security Module (HSM)
> +- Security Hardware Extension (SHE)
> +- Vehicular to Anything (V2X)
> +
> +Each of the above features is enabled through dedicated NXP H/W IP on the SoC.
> +On a single SoC, multiple hardware IP (or can say more than one secure enclave)
> +can exist.
> +
> +NXP SoCs enabled with the such secure enclaves(SEs) IPs are:

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but there appears to be a typo here. Should "with the such"
be changed to "with such"? Also, adding a space before the parenthesis in
"enclaves (SEs)" might improve readability.

> +i.MX93, i.MX8ULP
> +
> +To communicate with one or more co-existing SE(s) on SoC, there is/are dedicated
> +messaging units(MU) per SE. Each co-existing SE can have one or multiple exclusive
> +MUs, dedicated to itself. None of the MU is shared between two SEs. Communication

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but the grammar could be slightly improved. Would it be
better to say "None of the MUs are shared" instead of "None of the MU is
shared"?

[ ... ]

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=1