[libvirt] [PATCH 2/2] bridge: don't crash on bandwidth unplug with no bandwidth

Ján Tomko jtomko at redhat.com
Thu Jun 27 10:17:06 UTC 2013


On 06/27/2013 12:11 PM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> On 27.06.2013 11:56, Ján Tomko wrote:
>> On 06/27/2013 09:54 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>>> On 21.06.2013 19:30, Ján Tomko wrote:
>>>> If networkUnplugBandwidth is called on a network which has
>>>> no bandwidth defined, print a warning instead of crashing.
>>>>
>>>> This can happen when destroying a domain with bandwith if
>>>> bandwidth was removed from the network after the domain was
>>>> started.
>>>>
>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=975359
>>>> ---
>>>>  src/network/bridge_driver.c | 5 +++++
>>>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>>

>>>
>>> So the problem is, if user starts a domain with interface which has
>>> @floor set. The @floor requires a bandwidth to be set on the network the
>>> interface is to be plugged into. Then he destroys the network, clear
>>> <bandwidth/> from the network definition and starts the network again. I
>>> think this is the place which should be fixed. We should deny removing
>>> <bandwidth/> in case there's at least one interface attached with
>>> @floor. Similarly, we refuse to start domain if the corresponding
>>> network doesn't have any <bandwidth/> configured.
>>
>> We refuse to start domains when the network isn't active too, even if they
>> don't have bandwidth, yet we allow the networks to be shut down afterwards.
>>
>> I don't think we want to forbid shutting networks with bandwidth down (which
>> essentially removes all the bandwidth from it).
>>
>> Jan
> 
> Right. Good point, if user wants to shoot himself in the foot, we
> shouldn't disallow him to do that (there's just too much of cases which
> we would have to check). Libvirt's not foolproof. What we should do - or
> rather not do is SIGSEGV-ing if user pull the trigger.
> 
> ACK then
> 

Thanks, pushed now.

Jan




More information about the libvir-list mailing list