From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Markus Armbruster Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for July 27 Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 17:22:42 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20100726212849.GB2651@x200.localdomain> <4C4E0C05.5030004@codemonkey.ws> <4C4E1A33.7050709@codemonkey.ws> <4C4ED85B.2090807@codemonkey.ws> <4C4EDEF1.9060507@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Anthony Liguori , Chris Wright , kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org To: Kevin Wolf Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46294 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752661Ab0G0PWs (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:22:48 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C4EDEF1.9060507@redhat.com> (Kevin Wolf's message of "Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:28:17 +0200") Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Kevin Wolf writes: > Am 27.07.2010 15:00, schrieb Anthony Liguori: >> On 07/27/2010 02:19 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>> Anthony Liguori writes: >>> >>> >>>> - any additional input on probed_raw? >>>> >>> Isn't it a fait accompli? I stopped providing input when commit >>> 79368c81 appeared. >>> >> >> No. 79368c81 was to close the security hole (and I do consider it a >> security hole). But as I mentioned on the list, I'm also not satisfied >> with it and that's why I proposed probed_raw. I was hoping to get a >> little more input from those that objected to 79368c81 as to whether >> probed_raw was more agreeable. > > Actually I believe qraw is less agreeable. It just too much magic. You > wouldn't expect that your raw images are turned into some other format > that you can't mount or use with any other program any more. I also dislike probed_raw, for the same reasons. Raw can't be probed safely, by its very nature. For historical reasons, we try anyway. I think we should stop doing that, even though that breaks existing use relying on the misfeature. Announce it now, spit out scary warnings, kill it for good 1-2 releases later. If we're unwilling to do that, then I'd *strongly* prefer doing nothing over silently messing with the raw writes to sector 0 (so does Christoph, and he explained why). But since it's already committed, I figure it's here to stay.