qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Wright <chrisw@redhat.com>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@redhat.com>,
	"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"dlaor@redhat.com" <dlaor@redhat.com>,
	Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>,
	"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes for Oct 19
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 17:06:13 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101023000613.GM27794@x200.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CC1DDB0.5090403@codemonkey.ws>

* Anthony Liguori (anthony@codemonkey.ws) wrote:
> On 10/22/2010 01:20 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
> >I'm not sure about that.  That same new shiny Fedora 21 QEMU has no idea
> >what the right OS specific command to run in guest is.  Granted, it's
> >not likely that "reboot" or "shutdown -r now" are likely to change for
> >Linux guests, do we assume cygwin for Windows guests?
> 
> No, but I'll waive my hands and say that I'm sure Windows has some
> appropriate mechanism to do the same thing (like PowerShell).

OK (bleh), but it's still specific to the guest OS.

> >   Really seems to
> >make more sense to have a stable ABI and negotiate version.
> 
> I guess the point is: we can always teach QEMU about how to work
> around older guests.  We (usually) can't control the software that's
> present on the guest itself.

I don't understand why we'd work around an older guest if the host <->
guest interface is stable.  Sure it can be extended, but old interfaces
should keep on Just Working (TM).

> The more logic we have in QEMU, the less we have to change the
> software in the guest which means the more likely things will work.

Maybe you're saying the advantage of injecting the raw commands into
the guest is that a host rev will automagically give an old guest new
functionality?

> >Also, from the point of view of a cloud where a VM agent is awfully
> >close to provider having backdoor into VM...a freeform vm_system()
> >doesn't seem like it'd be real popular.
> 
> This is the best (irrational) argument against this practice.
> Obviously, there's no real security concern here, but the end-user
> view may be troubling.

Heh, cloud + security == irrational fear, basic axiom

> That said, VMware has an interface for exactly this at least it's an
> established practice.

OK, what about other bits of API?  I recall seeing things like cut'n
paste, reboot, ballooning, time, few bits that spice would care about...
Are you thinking that as well, or all in terms of read/write/exec?

thanks,
-chris

      reply	other threads:[~2010-10-23  0:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-10-19 15:14 [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes for Oct 19 Chris Wright
2010-10-20  8:21 ` Alexander Graf
2010-10-20  8:25   ` Paolo Bonzini
2010-10-20  8:30     ` Alexander Graf
2010-10-20 10:47   ` Avi Kivity
2010-10-20 12:16   ` Dor Laor
2010-10-21 10:22     ` Andrew Beekhof
2010-10-21 10:26       ` Dor Laor
2010-10-21 13:09       ` Anthony Liguori
2010-10-21 13:18         ` Daniel P. Berrange
2010-10-21 13:32           ` Anthony Liguori
2010-10-21 15:43             ` Andrew Beekhof
2010-10-21 16:25               ` Anthony Liguori
2010-10-21 16:37                 ` Chris Wright
2010-10-21 19:47                 ` Andrew Beekhof
2010-10-20 13:02   ` Anthony Liguori
2010-10-20 13:19     ` Daniel P. Berrange
2010-10-20 13:21       ` Anthony Liguori
2010-10-20 22:46         ` Dor Laor
2010-10-21  1:14           ` Alexander Graf
2010-10-21  7:45             ` Paolo Bonzini
2010-10-21 13:02               ` Anthony Liguori
2010-10-21 13:05                 ` Dor Laor
2010-10-22 17:29                 ` Chris Wright
2010-10-22 17:39                   ` Anthony Liguori
2010-10-22 18:20                     ` Chris Wright
2010-10-22 18:53                       ` Anthony Liguori
2010-10-23  0:06                         ` Chris Wright [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20101023000613.GM27794@x200.localdomain \
    --to=chrisw@redhat.com \
    --cc=agraf@suse.de \
    --cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
    --cc=dlaor@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).