[PATCH] docs: Describe protected virtualization guest setup

[Viktor Mihajlovski]

On 4/29/20 5:50 PM, Boris Fiuczynski wrote:
> 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 at linux.ibm.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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 at linux.ibm.com>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Boris Fiuczynski <fiuczy at linux.ibm.com>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Paulo de Rezende Pinatti <ppinatti at linux.ibm.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>    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?
> 
I can live with that.
>>
>>> 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
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Kind Regards,
    Viktor