Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 12:15:23PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> Yes indeed its a little crazy :-) As anthony mentioned if libvirt were
>> able to be notified of changes a user makes in the monitor, there's no
>> reason we could not allow end users to access the monitor of a VM
>> libvirt is managing. We just need to make sure libvirt doesn't miss
>> changes like attaching or detaching block devices, etc, because that'll
>> cause crash/data loss later when libvirt migrates or does save/restore,
>> etc because it'll launch QEMU with wrong args
>>
> You still have an inherent race here.
>
> user: plug in disk
> libvirt: start migration, still without disk
> qemu: libvirt, a disk has been plugged in.
That is true, but we'd still be considering direct monitor access to
be a 'expert' user mode of use. If they wish to shoot themselves in
the foot by triggering a migration at same time they are hotplugging
I'm fine if their whole leg gets blown away.
...while there is also nothing that speaks against blocking any device
hot-plugging while migration is ongoing. Independent of if there is some
management app involved or the user himself plays with multiple monitors.
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux