Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 8/8] docs: Improve documentation related to memory locking

On Tue, 2017-03-28 at 09:43 -0400, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > > Another stab at it (which plugs into my original version): > >  > >   [...] remove the limit on locked memory altogether. Thus, > >   enabling this option opens up to a potential security risk: > >   the host will be unable to reclaim the locked memory back > >   from the guest when it's running out of memory, which means > >   a malicious guest allocating large amounts of locked memory > >   could cause a denial-of-service attach on the host. Because > >   of this, using the option is discouraged unless your [...] > >  > > Does it look reasonable? >  > That looks fine, although I'd drop "discouraged" because that's > not helpful to those who must use the feature. I think it's better > to objectively explain what the problems are and how to prevent or > mitigate them. That's what I tried to do in my paragraph. The strong wording is intentional: we really, really don't want people to enable this unless their setup can't work without it.