From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:46828) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S63RO-0002Iw-Mz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 12:17:27 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S63RC-0002cJ-Le for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 12:17:18 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4087) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S63RC-0002c0-DQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 12:17:06 -0500 Message-ID: <4F5A3B06.4000302@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 18:16:54 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20120309141653.GH4883@orkuz.home> <4F5A1DBB.3030606@laine.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU fstatfs(2) and libvirt SELinux policy List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: libvir-list@redhat.com, Khoa Huynh , George Wilson , qemu-devel , Laine Stump Il 09/03/2012 17:07, Stefan Hajnoczi ha scritto: >> > So am I correct that this extra permission is only needed for a single >> > RHEL6 release? If qemu won't be doing fstafs on an ongoing basis, it >> > doesn't seem like a good idea to permanently open up the permissions >> > allowed by virt_use_nfs > Paolo, your discard improvements in QEMU add FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE > support. XFS supports this fallocate() flag in current kernels, > thereby making the XFS-specific support obsolete. > > I'm wondering whether it's worth expanding the SELinux policy if we > will have no fstatfs(2) callers in QEMU. Are you planning to drop the > XFS code? Chris Wedgwood said that on XFS you want to do discard even if the file is preallocated, while this is not true on other filesystems. So I guess the detection code should stay. Paolo