On 10/11/24 10:32 AM, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
Hi
On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 6:17 PM Stefan Berger <stefanb(a)linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/11/24 10:10 AM, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 5:49 PM Stefan Berger <stefanb(a)linux.ibm.com>
wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/4/24 9:32 AM, marcandre.lureau(a)redhat.com wrote:
>>>> From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau(a)redhat.com>
>>>>
>>>> Learn to parse a file path for the TPM state.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau(a)redhat.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> docs/formatdomain.rst | 19 ++++++++++++++
>>>> src/conf/domain_conf.c | 28
+++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> src/conf/domain_conf.h | 9 +++++++
>>>> src/conf/schemas/domaincommon.rng | 14 +++++++++++
>>>> tests/qemuxmlconfdata/tpm-emulator-tpm2.xml | 1 +
>>>> 5 files changed, 71 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/docs/formatdomain.rst b/docs/formatdomain.rst
>>>> index 4336cff3ac..992bb98730 100644
>>>> --- a/docs/formatdomain.rst
>>>> +++ b/docs/formatdomain.rst
>>>> @@ -8173,6 +8173,25 @@ Example: usage of the TPM Emulator
>>>> The default version used depends on the combination of hypervisor,
guest
>>>> architecture, TPM model and backend.
>>>>
>>>> +``source``
>>>> + The ``source`` element specifies the location of the TPM state
storage . This
>>>> + element only works with the ``emulator`` backend.
>>>> +
>>>> + If not specified, the storage configuration is left to libvirt
discretion.
>>>> +
>>>> + This element requires that swtpm v0.7 or later is installed.
>>>> +
>>>> + The following attributes are supported:
>>>> +
>>>> + ``type``
>>>> + The type of storage. It's possible to provide "file"
to utilize a single
>>>> + file or block device where the TPM state will be stored.
>>>> +
>>>> + ``path``
>>>> + The path to the TPM state storage.
>>>
>>> The file backend of swtpm does not do the locking similar to what the
>>> dir backend does because those who added the file backend didn't
>>> need/want it. If we now give full control to the path of the TPM state
>>> file to the user via the domain XML then whose fault is it if two VMs
>>> use the same path to a file backend and stomp on the TPM state file? Is
>>> it the fault of the user because of how he defined the path in the XMLs?
>>
>> Imho, it's desirable to have a similar locking behaviour regardless of
>> the backend and prevent users for mistakenly using the same file.
>
> We will only be able to support the locking with an option on the
> command line for swtpm (refelected by a new capability verb) and support
> this series here once that has become available with a new version of
> swtpm. Otherwise I would avoid giving full control to the path to the
> users but let libvirt choose a per-VM unique name for the state file.
The use-case is to let the user define a specific block device path.
Why would they store it on a block device rather than a file system?