Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 06:42:01PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:Attached are the args (*_args) and return structures (*_ret) for all the calls covered by the remote protocol, that is to say everything except Save, Restore and CoreDump (see previous email).The only problem area are the upper limits imposed on the lengths of various strings and arrays. The upper limits seem to be required for safely decoding messages from untrusted sources. Some of them however would impose limits on such things as the number of CPUs supported, and perhaps those limits are too low (or too high)? I don't really have any experience of the sort of huge machines that people might be running libvirt on.SGI did a preso at the Xen summit about their 1024 CPU monster ia64 box. So given that such a thing already exists, we need biggger to account for future developments. One thing I'm not clear - are these limits actually applied at the protocol level, or is the protocol completely variable length and these limits enforced during decoding ? If the latter, then this isn't so critical to get perfect, because we can do updates without breaking back-compat.
The latter, so yeah afaics we should be able to increase them later without any harmful effects on ABI compatibility.
I've bumped up some of the limits in response to your comments. Rich. -- Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ 64 Baker Street, London, W1U 7DF Mobile: +44 7866 314 421 Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Charlie Peters (USA) and David Owens (Ireland)
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature