In 7.2.1 [basic.lval] p9 we have a cross-reference to the parent subclause:

[ Note: A glvalue may have complete or incomplete non-void type. Class and array prvalues can have cv-qualified types; other prvalues always have cv-unqualified types. See 7.2 [expr.prop]. — end note]

This was reasonable when 3.10 [basic.lval] was in a completely different Clause from 5 [expr] and said "See Clause 5", but they are now siblings, and referring to the parent is not very helpful. Telling me to see 7.2 when I'm reading 7.2 doesn't help me.

Should it refer to 7.2.2 [expr.type], which contains the relevant rule that used to be in [expr]?

If a prvalue initially has the type “cv T”, where T is a cv-unqualified non-class, non-array type, the type of the expression is adjusted to T prior to any further analysis.