Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes for Oct 19

[Dor Laor <dlaor@redhat.com>]

On 10/21/2010 03:02 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 10/21/2010 02:45 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 10/21/2010 03:14 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>> I agree that some agent code for basic stuff like live snapshot
>>>> sync with the filesystem is small enough and worth to host within
>>>> qemu. Maybe we do need more than one project?
>>>
>>> No, please. That's exactly what I don't want to see. The
>>> libvirt/qemu/virt-man split is killing us already. How is this going
>>> to become with 20 driver packs for the guest?
>>
>> Agreed. Not relying on Mata Hari and reinventing a dbus/WMI interface
>> would be yet another case of QEMU NIH.
>
> I think we're about 10 steps ahead of where we should be right now.
>
> The first step is just identifying what interfaces we need in a guest
> agent. So far, I think we can get away with a very small number of
> interfaces (mainly read/write files, execute command).
>
>> The same argument also works on the backend BTW, it can be virtio
>> serial but also a Xen pvconsole and that wheel should not be
>> reinvented either.
>>
>> The guest agent should be a pluggable architecture, and QEMU can
>> provide plugins for sync, spice, "info balloon" and everything else it
>> needs.
>
> virtio-serial is essentially our plugin interface. The core QEMU agent
> would use org.qemu.guest-agent and a spice against could use
> org.spice-space.guest-agent.
>
> The QEMU agent should have an interface that terminates in QEMU itself.

I agree that for some think with semi-transaction oriented actions like 
the fs-freeze on live snapshot, we need a small, self confined code base.

>
> Regards,
>
> Anthony Liguori
>
>> Paolo
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html