From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O6Pea-0002ok-Mj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 10:51:20 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=51600 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O6PeS-0002it-8V for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 10:51:20 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O6PeO-0005SN-R2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 10:51:12 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40441) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O6PeO-0005Ru-JJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 10:51:08 -0400 Message-ID: <4BD5A858.5000508@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 17:51:04 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [libvirt] Libvirt debug API References: <4BD1971B.7060907@redhat.com> <4BD1A543.1050004@codemonkey.ws> <4BD1ADA2.2050605@redhat.com> <4BD1E723.6070005@codemonkey.ws> <4BD2BDE0.7020907@redhat.com> <4BD3B965.3060205@codemonkey.ws> <4BD42CDB.2030901@redhat.com> <4BD4F20D.8030901@codemonkey.ws> <20100426095949.GA1342@redhat.com> <4BD5915F.3060405@codemonkey.ws> <20100426133120.GD1342@redhat.com> <4BD59874.2000207@codemonkey.ws> <4BD59C9E.2000506@redhat.com> <4BD5A109.9060004@codemonkey.ws> <4BD5A263.3070908@redhat.com> <4BD5A2F2.7070805@codemonkey.ws> <4BD5A57E.3060602@redhat.com> <4BD5A7C5.7010706@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4BD5A7C5.7010706@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: "libvir-list@redhat.com" , qemu-devel , Luiz Capitulino , Chris Lalancette , Jiri Denemark On 04/26/2010 05:48 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> We could easily reuse that. Any other security context code would >> be custom written; so it can be written as a qemud plugin instead of >> a bit of code that goes before a qemu launch. > > I think we're mostly in agreement with respect to the need to have > more control over the security context the qemu runs in. Whether it's > launched via a daemon or directly I think is an implementation detail > that we can debate when we get closer to an actual implementation. > Good, as I haven't decided yet which side I'm on. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function