clarify

diff --git a/openpower/sv/comparison_table.mdwn b/openpower/sv/comparison_table.mdwn
index ac595322c56104a387e829d71f110f24fa17ef10..0d90d3787d4255a92f25b55134085f5482fd5ad3 100644 (file)
--- a/openpower/sv/comparison_table.mdwn
+++ b/openpower/sv/comparison_table.mdwn
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@
 * (19): RISC-V Vectors are not stand-alone, i.e. like SVE2 and AVX-512 are critically dependent on the Scalar ISA (an additional ~96 instructions for the Scalar RV64GC set (RV64GC is equivalent to the Linux Compliancy Level)
 * (20): Like the original Cray RVV is a truly scalable Vector ISA (Cray setvl instruction).  However, like SVE2, the Maximum Vector length is a Silicon-partner choice, which creates similar limitations that SVP64 does not have.
   The RISC-V Founders strongly discouraged efforts by programmers to find out the Maximum Vector Length, as an effort to steer programmers towards Silicon-independent assembler. This requires all algorithms to contain a loop construct.
-  MAXVL in SVP64 is a Spec-hard-fixed quantity and consequently such loop constructs are not 100% necessary.
+  MAXVL in SVP64 is a Spec-hard-fixed quantity therefore loop constructs are not necessary 100% of the time.
 * (21): like SVP64 it is up to the hardware implementor to choose whether to support 128-bit elements.
 * (22): [NEC SX Aurora](https://ftp.libre-soc.org/NEC_SX_Aurora_TSUBASA_VectorEngine-as-manual-v1.2.pdf) is based on the original Cray Vectors
 * (23): [Aurora ISA guide](https://sxauroratsubasa.sakura.ne.jp/documents/guide/pdfs/Aurora_ISA_guide.pdf) Appendix-3 11.1 p508