On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 07:03:52PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > The > > <os firmware='efi'> > <firmware type='efi'> > <feature enabled='no' name='enrolled-keys'/> > </firmware> > </os> > > repeats the firmware attribute twice. This has no functional benefit, as > evidenced by fact that we use a single struct field to store both > attributes, while needlessly introducing an error scenario. The XML can > just be simplified to: > > <os firmware='efi'> > <firmware> > <feature enabled='no' name='enrolled-keys'/> > </firmware> > </os> > > which also means that we don't need to emit the empty element > <firmware type='efi'/> for all existing configs too.
My original motivation was that if we ever need to introduce another
attribute to the <firmware> element it would be nicely grouped together.
But I guess it wound not be a big deal if we would have:
<os firmware='efi'>
<firmware someAttr='value'>
<feature enabled='no' name='enrolled-keys'/>
</firmware>
</os>
This would look reasonable as well so
Reviewed-by: Pavel Hrdina <[email protected]>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
