From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1JGjQT-0004ao-Vv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:18:06 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1JGjQS-0004aT-NH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:18:05 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JGjQS-0004aQ-Jz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:18:04 -0500
Received: from ppsw-5.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.135])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <maw48@hermes.cam.ac.uk>) id 1JGjQS-0006CV-AL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:18:04 -0500
From: Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: AW: Re: [Qemu-devel] VMport patch
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 23:17:31 +0000
References: <20080120222742.B2F993A9B@csgraf.de>
	<4793D4B6.8030408@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <4793D4B6.8030408@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200801202317.32855.mark.williamson@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Sender: "M.A. Williamson" <maw48@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
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.gnu.org/pipermail/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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

> > I think it would be great to maintain compatibility with the binary-only
> > versions of the vm tools though.
>
> But you're changing the semantics of the x86 instruction set.  You
> potentially break a real operating system.  It also eliminates the
> possibility of nesting with something like kqemu because you can't trap
> all PIO operations.

Maybe have a commandline flag, and have it switched off by default?  Or, ev=
en=20
better, would be to detect valid vmware tools behaviour and switch it on if=
f=20
that happened; the default being to behave normally for OSes that aren't=20
running the VMware tools..

Cheers,
Mark

> Regards,
>
> Anthony Liguori
>
> > Regards,
> >
> > Alex
> >
> > ----- Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht -----
> > Von: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 20. Januar 2008 22:40
> > An: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
> > Betreff: Re: [Qemu-devel] VMport patch
> >
> > Filip Navara wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> the current version of QEMU emulates the VMware backdoor I/O port and
> >> it works quite well. Unfortunately it doesn't emulate the VMware
> >> behavior of ignoring the I/O permissions when accessing this special
> >> port. The attached patch corrects it. It's important to ignore the
> >> permissions, so that user mode VMware tools can communicate to the
> >> backdoor. =3D
> >
> > I really dislike that VMware relies on this.  It's very hard to
> > implement in kqemu or KVM.  I think it would be better to modify
> > open-vm-tools than to modify QEMU.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Anthony Liguori
> >
> >> Best regards,
> >> Filip Navara



=2D-=20
Push Me Pull You - Distributed SCM tool (http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~maw48/pmp=
u/)