On 07/19/2016 11:21 AM, anshul makkar wrote:
On 19/07/16 14:30, Doug Goldstein wrote:
On 7/19/16 4:05 AM, Anshul Makkar wrote:
Signed-off-by: Anshul Makkar <anshul.mak...@citrix.com>
---
* Resending the patch due to incomplete subject in the previous patch.
docs/misc/xsm-flask.txt | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/docs/misc/xsm-flask.txt b/docs/misc/xsm-flask.txt
index 62f15dd..bf8bb6e 100644
Some examples of what FLASK can do:
- - Prevent two domains from communicating via event channels or grants
- - Control which domains can use device passthrough (and which devices)
+ - Prevent two domains types from communicating via event channels or grants
+ - Control which type of domains can use device passthrough (and which devices)
I disagree with this snippet. This is an example of what you can do with
FLASK. You can use flask to do those two actions. Adding the word
"types" in there takes it from being a concrete example to being more
ambiguous.
"Prevent domains belonging to different types to communicate via event channels or
grants". Does this sounds better.
I think that its important to use the word "type" so that user doesn't get a
wrong impression that the policy is per domain, while in actual its per type.
I think it would be clearer to leave the examples as is, but add a sentence to
the
following paragraph about how the policy is written based on types.
For the other changes, I agree Doug's rewording is a bit clearer than the
original.
--
Daniel De Graaf
National Security Agency
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
