From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=53860 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OZ71q-0001CQ-NT
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:49:59 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1OZ71o-0003Wi-NP
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:49:58 -0400
Received: from mail-vw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.212.45]:47453)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1OZ71o-0003WX-IN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:49:56 -0400
Received: by vws13 with SMTP id 13so85175vws.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 11:49:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4C3E06DA.8080302@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 13:50:02 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Make default invocation of block drivers
	safer
References: <1279123952-1576-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com>
	<20100714184311.GA9383@lst.de>
In-Reply-To: <20100714184311.GA9383@lst.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On 07/14/2010 01:43 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Err, strong NACK.  Please don't start messing with the contents of the
> data plane, we're getting into real trouble there.  It's perfectly
> valid for a guest to create an image inside an image, and with hardware
> support for nested virtualization I guess this use case will become
> rather common, just as it already is on S/390 with VM.
>    

Then we have to remove block format probing.

The two things are fundamentally incompatible.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori