On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 01:26:38PM +0100, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
The original text was not explaining what this attribute actually
controls and could have been interpreted as a control switch for the
Secure boot feature in firmwares.
Yep, I've indeed seen people misread it as such.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Hrdina <phrdina(a)redhat.com>
---
docs/formatdomain.rst | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/docs/formatdomain.rst b/docs/formatdomain.rst
index a2ea2690a5..c101d5a1f1 100644
--- a/docs/formatdomain.rst
+++ b/docs/formatdomain.rst
@@ -167,7 +167,9 @@ harddisk, cdrom, network) determining where to obtain/find the boot
image.
in the guest memory the file should be mapped. For instance, if the loader
path points to an UEFI image, ``type`` should be ``pflash``. Moreover, some
firmwares may implement the Secure boot feature. Attribute ``secure`` can be
- used then to control it. :since:`Since 2.1.0`
+ used to tell the hypervisor that the firmware implements Secure Boot Feature.
s/Feature/feature/
Perhaps: "firmware is capable of Secure Boot feature"
+ It cannot be used to enable or disable the feature itself in the
firmware.
+ :since:`Since 2.1.0`
This additional clarification is good.
(Nit-pick: not this patch's fault: consistently use "Secure Boot"; I see
both "Secure boot" and "Secure Boot".)
Address the above only if you're respinning. FWIW:
Reviewed-by: Kashyap Chamarthy <kchamart(a)redhat.com>
``nvram``
Some UEFI firmwares may want to use a non-volatile memory to store some
variables. In the host, this is represented as a file and the absolute path
--
2.30.2
--
/kashyap