On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 02:21:18AM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
On 02/03/2015 11:47 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> On 02.02.2015 15:08, Lin Ma wrote:
>> * Get the live state info of a virtual network through netcf in
networkGetXMLDesc.
>> * Add --system flag for net-dumpxml to show the live state info.
>> * Check the live state info in net-destroy.
>> * Add --force flag for net-destroy to forcibly destroy the virtual network.
>> * Check the transient interfaces info in iface-unbridge.
>>
>> ---
>> Lin Ma (3):
>> bridge_driver: Return the live state info of a given virtual network
>> virsh: prevent destroying a in-used network for net-destroy
>> virsh: prevent removing a in-used bridge for iface-unbridge
>>
>> include/libvirt/libvirt-network.h | 1 +
>> src/Makefile.am | 3 +
>> src/network/bridge_driver.c | 141 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> src/network/bridge_driver_platform.h | 7 ++
>> tests/Makefile.am | 4 +
>> tools/virsh-interface.c | 25 ++++++-
>> tools/virsh-network.c | 62 ++++++++++++++-
>> tools/virsh.pod | 8 +-
>> 8 files changed, 241 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
> So I've spent some time thinking about this. I don't really like the
> idea of producing completely different XML (it doesn't even have
> <network/> as its root element!). But I see what you're trying to
> achieve. How about putting the bridged interfaces into the network
> definition (on request signalized by a flag, of course).
I think that if we're going to add the list of connected guest devices
to a network's status, that it should just always be there - adding a
new flag for every little bit of different status sets a bad precedent
and sets us up to have an infinitely increasing number of flags.
Like I mentioned in my response to one of the patches, I think this
information is better gathered and maintained by the bridge driver as
guests connect to / disconnect from a network; this avoids the necessity
of dragging netcf into the picture and allows much better information -
the name of the domain using each interface can be included.
I think we should consider whether we should expose it as an explicit
API too, rather than just stuffing it into the XML as a way to avoid
the work of defining an API.
The XML is generally describing the configuration of the virtual
network. This isn't really configuration information, but rather
a reporting about usage of the network, so it isn't a clearly
compelling thing to put in the XML.
> I think we've come to a point where we need to introduce
live and config
> XML (like we have for domains). We already have that to some extent, but
> not truly.
I think the situation is more that we have live and config XML, but
there may be a small problem here and there. As a matter of fact, a long
time ago virsh wasn't using the live XML to edit a network, and this was
causing problems (e.g. if you tried to edit a network twice without
restarting it, the second time you would lose all the changes from the
first edit).
Regards,
Daniel
--
|:
http://berrange.com -o-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|:
http://libvirt.org -o-
http://virt-manager.org :|
|:
http://autobuild.org -o-
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|:
http://entangle-photo.org -o-
http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|