[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/3] Support for marking domains as "tainted"



On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 08:33:09PM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:28:45PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > There are various configurations for virtual domains that we allow,
> > but do not wish to actively support in production environments.
> > The support situation is similar to that of binary only or non-GPL
> > kernel modules, so borrow the kernel's idea of "tainting".
> > 
> > When an undesirable configuration is used on a running VM, set a
> > suitable taint flag and log a warning. OS distro bug triagers can
> > see these warnings and decide whether to support users filing bugs
> > in this scenarios
> 
>   Looks fine, but post 0.9.1 obviously.
> Patch 1 and 2 no problem. For patch 3 I wonder if it's a good idea to
> open the logs if we don't have to report a taint violation, which I
> would assume is not frequent.
> In general the idea of making easier to append a log string to the domain
> log file could be used in various places (though I remember arguments
> that since it's given to the QEmu process libvirtd should avoid touch
> it, on the other hand that's the best place to report per domain
> incidents), maybe we could just have a Snprintf like function to append
> to it and then only use it if we detect a tainted problem to report.
> 
>   Could be done as refinement on top of patch 3,

I re-wrote patch 3 completely to work along these lines and posted a
new series.


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 :|

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]