On 09/18/2017 09:12 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 09/11/2017 04:32 PM, John Ferlan wrote:
> v1:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2017-September/msg00103.html
>
> Changes since v1:
>
> Split into 3 parts... The first patch would be the bare minimum using
> STRPREFIX instead of STREQ type comparisons for the incoming path to
> be "/dev/cdrom[N]" or "/dev/srN" (or resolved to that).
>
> This would "work" for the most part, but then since it's possible to
> make even more checks let's check against the collected node device
> data. Patch 2 therefore will "tag" the already collected cdrom data
> with a capability. This allows patch3 to find any/all CDROM's on the
> host and compare the resolved path to that list of devices returning
> "true" if something matches a node device declared physical CDROM.
>
> I split things up mainly to make it easier to decide whether patch 1
> is sufficient or not. If patch2 and patch3 are OK, I would also add
> a release note indicating the improvement to find CDROM by node device
> capability. It's a separate "improvement" on it's own as well.
Whether
> it's truly useful or not, is a different question...
[1]
>
> John Ferlan (3):
> qemu: Be more selective when determining cdrom for taint messaging
ACK to this one ^^
> nodedev: Add capability bit to detect 'cdrom' devices
> qemu: Add inquiry to nodedev for cdrom taint checking
However, these two ^^ look like an overkill to me. It's still just a
taint message that nobody cares about. Or?
1: Yeah, I don't think we really need such a big hammer for tiny nail.
But I might be missing something.
Michal
I agree with you, but just in case someone wanted to use that sledge
hammer in order to catch some really obscure corner condition, I figured
I'd show it was possible...
Still I can give it a few more days to see if someone indicates they
would also like to see usage of the sledge hammer.
John