Re: [PATCH] docs: Describe protected virtualization guest setup

On 4/29/20 5:15 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 05:08:31PM +0200, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote: >> >> >> On 4/29/20 3:29 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 05:58:02PM +0200, Boris Fiuczynski wrote: >>>> From: Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov(a)linux.ibm.com&gt; >>>> >>>> Protected virtualization/IBM Secure Execution for Linux protects >>>> guest memory and state from the host. >>>> >>>> Add some basic information about technology and a brief guide >>>> on setting up secure guests with libvirt. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov(a)linux.ibm.com&gt; >>>> Reviewed-by: Boris Fiuczynski <fiuczy(a)linux.ibm.com&gt; >>>> Reviewed-by: Paulo de Rezende Pinatti <ppinatti(a)linux.ibm.com&gt; >>>> --- >>>>    docs/kbase.html.in                      |   3 + >>>>    docs/kbase/protected_virtualization.rst | 188 >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> >>> I'd suggest calling this  s390_protected_virt.rst >> We can do that. >>> >>>> diff --git a/docs/kbase.html.in b/docs/kbase.html.in >>>> index c586e0f676..05a3239224 100644 >>>> --- a/docs/kbase.html.in >>>> +++ b/docs/kbase.html.in >>>> @@ -14,6 +14,9 @@ >>>>            <dt><a href="kbase/secureusage.html">Secure usage</a></dt> >>>>            <dd>Secure usage of the libvirt APIs</dd> >>>> +        <dt><a >>>> href="kbase/protected_virtualization.html">Protected >>>> virtualization</a></dt> >>> >>> "s390 Protected virtualization"  as the title >>> >> The terminology that was used in the KVM upstream code is simply >> protected >> virtualization without a prefix, so I'd avoid creating a new >> denomination in >> libvirt. > > Putting an "s390" prefix on this isn't inventing new terminology - it is > just making it obvious to users what target it applies to. Daniel & Viktor: Would calling it "Protected virtualization on s390" serve both of you?

> >> Alternatively we could use the (unmodified) marketing name "IBM Secure >> Execution for Linux" here and below in the RST and reverse the "also >> known >> as" sentence in the overview. > > That's even worse IMHO. Just put an s390 prefix on the current text. > > Regards, > Daniel >