Hi Stefano,
On 05/10/2018 19:47, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Add a new document to provide information on how to use dom0less related
features and their current limitations.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <[email protected]>
---
Changes in v4:
- rename to .txt
- improve wording
Changes in v3:
- add patch
---
docs/misc/arm/dom0less.txt | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As said on the previous version, you likely need to add an entry in
docs/INDEX.
1 file changed, 47 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 docs/misc/arm/dom0less.txt
diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/dom0less.txt b/docs/misc/arm/dom0less.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..df96b41
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/misc/arm/dom0less.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
+Dom0less
+========
+
+"Dom0less" is a set of Xen features that enable the deployment of a Xen
+system without an hardware domain (often referred to as "dom0").
I realize I suggested the wording hardware domain. But reading this
again, it feels that "control domain" may be the best wording here.
Indeed what we avoid is the toolstack and domain control the domains.
You begin the document writing "it is a set of Xen featueres that enable
deployment of a Xen system without an hardware domain". I understand
this sentence as there would be no "hardware domain". But then you write
"create a set of DomU alongside Dom0".
Furthermore, at some point the control domain would disappear and the
DomID 0 may be allocated to a DomUs. Adding further confusion to a user
seen the ID would be 0.
So I still think that using "Dom0" within the document is misleading and
also the feature name. I don't have a good suggestion for the feature
name. But at very least I would avoid the word "Dom0" everywhere in that
document.
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
