From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41641 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PxKAN-0005f9-9o
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 09:15:08 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1PxKAL-0007r5-Dt
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 09:15:07 -0500
Received: from mail-iy0-f173.google.com ([209.85.210.173]:55433)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1PxKAL-0007ql-Ao
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 09:15:05 -0500
Received: by iym7 with SMTP id 7so652894iym.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 06:15:05 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4D778B66.8080101@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 08:15:02 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/22] QAPI Round 1
References: <1299460984-15849-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com>	<AANLkTika3BkiECzQKrjUradj7zH+WrdunVR7EMvj8R8o@mail.gmail.com>	<4D7500C8.1080101@codemonkey.ws>	<4D760F2B.7030004@redhat.com>	<4D7630BA.4010609@us.ibm.com>	<4D763311.5030905@redhat.com>	<4D763525.2030700@codemonkey.ws>	<4D763674.8000600@redhat.com>	<4D7638BE.60808@codemonkey.ws>	<4D763A61.2020809@redhat.com>	<4D763F76.2020003@codemonkey.ws>	<4D7642C1.90604@redhat.com>	<4D764551.4000409@codemonkey.ws>	<4D766B0E.9030908@redhat.com>	<4D768134.9000006@codemonkey.ws>	<4D773FAC.4090208@redhat.com>	<4D777CD5.30403@codemonkey.ws>	<4D777D40.4020000@redhat.com>
	<4D7785C7.6080603@codemonkey.ws> <4D7786B7.8060208@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D7786B7.8060208@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Michael D Roth <mdroth@us.ibm.com>, Adam Litke <agl@us.ibm.com>, Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>

On 03/09/2011 07:55 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 03/09/2011 03:51 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>>> { execute: 'write-keystore' arguments: { 'key': 'foo', 'value': 
>>>>> 'bar' } }
>>>>
>>>> This is coming from the guest? 
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>
>>
>> So what about:
>>
>> { 'KeyStore': { '*foo': 'str', '*otherkey': 'str' } }
>> [ 'guest-write-keystore', { 'keystore': 'KeyStore' }, 'none' ]
>>
>> { 'GUEST_UPDATE_KEYSTORE': { 'keys': [ 'str' ] } }
>
> (why the CAPS?)

Sad to say, but legacy.  That's how we do events today.

>>
>> In this model, the key store is actually stored in the guest.  If the 
>> guest wants the latest version of a value, it sends an event to get 
>> keys updated.  The host can update keys at any point in time.
>
> This survives live migration, but not guest reboots or crashes.

Right, management tool (or QEMU) needs to keep a copy if it's to survive 
reset.

But since we don't have a concrete use-case, I'm really just trying to 
show that we don't need bidirectional RPC for these types of things.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori