----- "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > diff --git a/docs/schemas/storageencryption.rng
> b/docs/schemas/storageencryption.rng
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/docs/schemas/storageencryption.rng
> > @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
<snip>
> > + <element name='encryption'>
> > + <attribute name='format'>
> > + <choice>
> > + <value>unencrypted</value>
> > + <value>default</value>
> > + <value>qcow</value>
> > + </choice>
> > + </attribute>
>
> I don't think we should include 'unencrypted' here. If a volume is
> not encrypted, we should simply omit the <encryption> element
> entirely in the domain / storage volume XML doc.
Fixed.
> > + <element name='secret'>
> > + <attribute name='type'>
> > + <choice>
> > + <value>passphrase</value>
> > + </choice>
> > + </attribute>
> > + <optional>
> > + <attribute name='secret_id'>
> > + <text/>
> > + </attribute>
>
> Lets just call this attribute 'uuid' - no need to have
> the word 'secret' prefixed on it too.
Fixed. I'd prefer to keep this attribute defined a generic string (as opposed to the strict hexadecimal UUID format) because some of the possible remote backends might require a different identifier format.
<snip>
> Tiny indentation bug crept in there.
<snip>
> And there too.
Fixed both.
Thanks for the review,
Mirek
--
Libvir-list mailing list
Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list