From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=40560 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OJ5Mi-0002V2-0P for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 31 May 2010 09:49:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OJ5Md-0003b4-4B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 31 May 2010 09:49:15 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:11655) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OJ5Mc-0003aw-TH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 31 May 2010 09:49:11 -0400 Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 10:48:59 -0300 From: Luiz Capitulino Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: RFC: blockdev_add & friends, brief rationale, QMP docs Message-ID: <20100531104859.1e63fa85@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: <4C0015E6.50805@redhat.com> <4C0016B3.6000505@codemonkey.ws> <20100528162451.2d10859d@redhat.com> <4C022BCB.5000907@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Markus Armbruster Cc: Kevin Wolf , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Avi Kivity , Gerd Hoffmann On Mon, 31 May 2010 13:05:37 +0200 Markus Armbruster wrote: > Avi Kivity writes: > > > On 05/28/2010 10:24 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > >> > >>> If a password is needed, we should throw an error and let the QMP client > >>> set the password and try again. > >>> > >> It's what we do today, a password should be set with block_passwd before > >> issuing the change command. Otherwise an error is throw. > >> > > > > Is the password some kind of global or per-monitor property? In that > > case it doesn't work with parallel execution of commands; better to > > have a password field (or assign IDs to passwords and require a > > passwordid=... argument). > > It sets the password in the host BlockDriverState. Which must already > exist, i.e. you do it after blockdev_add. > > What happens if the guest device accesses the host drive before the key > is set? It's supposed to fail, right Kevin? > > Anything wrong with passing the password as argument? Did we avoid that > to protect naive users from exposing their password via argv[]? That > "argument" doesn't apply to QMP. >