qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] Why I advise against using ivshmem


From: David Marchand
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Why I advise against using ivshmem
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 10:25:30 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/24.5.0

On 06/18/2014 05:01 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
late onto this thread: SUSE Security team has just recently
done a thorough review of QEMU ivshmem code because a customer has
requested this be supported in SLES12. Multiple security-related
patches were submitted by Stefan Hajnoczi and Sebastian Krahmer, and I
fear they are probably still not merged for lack of active
maintainer... In such cases, after review, I expect them to be picked
up by Peter as committer or via qemu-trivial.

So -1, against dropping it.

Are these patches on patchwork ?

Vincent, you will find an RFC for an ivshmem-test in the qemu-devel
list archives or possibly on my qtest branch. The blocking issue that
I haven't worked on yet is that we can't unconditionally run the qtest
because it depends on KVM enabled at configure time (as opposed to
runtime) to have the device available.
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/336367/

As others have stated before, the nahanni server seems unmaintained,
thus not getting packaged by SUSE either and making testing the
interrupt parts of ivshmem difficult - unless we sort out and fill
with actual test code my proposed qtest.

Thanks for the RFC patch.

About ivshmem server, yes I will look at it.
I will see what I can propose or if importing nahanni implementation as-is is the best solution.

Anyway, first, documentation.


--
David Marchand



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]