Signed-off-by: Guoyi Tu <tugy@chinatelecom.cn>
---
  docs/devel/multi-process.rst | 8 ++++++--
  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/devel/multi-process.rst b/docs/devel/multi-process.rst
index 4ef539c0b0..223f878139 100644
--- a/docs/devel/multi-process.rst
+++ b/docs/devel/multi-process.rst
@@ -185,7 +185,9 @@ Another difference is that in the vhost user model, 
a single daemon can
  support multiple QEMU instances. This is contrary to the security regime
  desired, in which the emulation application should only be allowed to
  access the files or devices the VM it's running on behalf of can access.
-#### qemu-io model
+
+qemu-io model
+'''''''''''''

  ``qemu-io`` is a test harness used to test changes to the QEMU block 
backend
  object code (e.g., the code that implements disk images for disk driver
@@ -587,7 +589,9 @@ described below attempt to ameliorate this effect by 
allowing the
  emulation process to communicate directly with the kernel KVM driver.
  The KVM file descriptors created would be passed to the emulation process
  via initialization messages, much like the guest memory table is done.
-#### MMIO acceleration
+
+MMIO acceleration
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

  Vhost user applications can receive guest virtio driver stores directly
  from KVM. The issue with the eventfd mechanism used by vhost user is
-- 
2.17.1


-- 
Guoyi

On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 at 08:46, Guoyi Tu <tugy@chinatelecom.cn> wrote:
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Guoyi Tu <tugy@chinatelecom.cn>
> ---
>   docs/devel/multi-process.rst | 8 ++++++--
>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

I have a couple of questions about whether these are
the right heading levels. But this document uses quite
a lot of heading/subheading levels, and I'm not very
familiar with the contents, so my suggestions below might
not be right.

> diff --git a/docs/devel/multi-process.rst b/docs/devel/multi-process.rst
> index 4ef539c0b0..223f878139 100644
> --- a/docs/devel/multi-process.rst
> +++ b/docs/devel/multi-process.rst
> @@ -185,7 +185,9 @@ Another difference is that in the vhost user model,
> a single daemon can
>   support multiple QEMU instances. This is contrary to the security regime
>   desired, in which the emulation application should only be allowed to
>   access the files or devices the VM it's running on behalf of can access.
> -#### qemu-io model
> +
> +qemu-io model
> +'''''''''''''

Should this be ^^^^^^, i.e. same heading level as "vhost user model"
earlier in this subsection?

>   ``qemu-io`` is a test harness used to test changes to the QEMU block
> backend
>   object code (e.g., the code that implements disk images for disk driver
> @@ -587,7 +589,9 @@ described below attempt to ameliorate this effect by
> allowing the
>   emulation process to communicate directly with the kernel KVM driver.
>   The KVM file descriptors created would be passed to the emulation process
>   via initialization messages, much like the guest memory table is done.
> -#### MMIO acceleration
> +
> +MMIO acceleration
> +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This seems like the right heading level, but should the
following headings ("data structures", "master descriptor",
"slave descriptor", "kvm_io_device ops") drop down a heading
level from ^^^ to ''', on the basis that they're sub-headings
under "MMIO acceleration" ?

thanks
-- PMM