From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37799) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YzNAc-00012R-1k for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 06:42:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YzNAX-0002mX-Nz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 06:42:13 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:36163) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YzNAX-0002mN-Jo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Jun 2015 06:42:09 -0400 Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 12:42:04 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20150601123957-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> References: <1430320913-20737-1-git-send-email-somlo@cmu.edu> <1430320913-20737-5-git-send-email-somlo@cmu.edu> <20150531181048.GC5268@redhat.com> <556C046B.9070704@redhat.com> <20150601092645-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <556C1F63.1090605@redhat.com> <20150601121908-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <556C3576.8020507@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <556C3576.8020507@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V4 4/4] fw_cfg: insert fw_cfg file blobs via qemu cmdline List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Laszlo Ersek Cc: matt.fleming@intel.com, "Gabriel L. Somlo" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, gsomlo@gmail.com, kraxel@redhat.com, Paolo Bonzini On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 12:35:34PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 06/01/15 12:23, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 11:01:23AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 01/06/2015 09:28, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >>>> I don't feel overly strongly about it; just "mechanism, not policy" > >>>> looks like a good tradition (well, good excuse anyway). > >>> > >>> Most users never see warnings. We ship it, we support it. > >>> If we don't want to support it, let's not ship it. > >> > >> Then we should rm -rf half of QEMU. :) > >> > >> Seriously, I agree wholeheartedly with not baking policy into QEMU. A > >> lot of QEMU command-line hacking really is just a shortcut to avoid > >> continuous recompilation. I don't think it's reasonable to expect that > >> it constitutes a stable API. > >> > >> Paolo > > > > Still, reserving part of the namespace for QEMU internal use > > is *not* policy, it's just good engineering. > > > > How about we forbid adding files under "etc/" ? > > > > That would be enough to avoid conflicts. > > Some of the current fw_cfg files, like "bootorder", are not under > "etc/". Well bootorder is there so at least it will always fail. We do have stuff under /rom. > Hence the earlier proposal to restrict the user (to under opt/, > IIRC), rather than ourselves. > > Thanks > Laszlo How about we pre-pend opt/ to user-supplied names? Will fix this without limiting user in any way. -- MST