[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Should Qemu monitor be enabled by default
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 09:40:26PM +0100, Christian Limpach wrote: > On 4/12/07, Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >This part of the patch does not look correct: > > > >-- a/tools/python/xen/xend/image.py Thu Apr 12 13:18:08 2007 +0100 > >+++ b/tools/python/xen/xend/image.py Thu Apr 12 13:21:26 2007 +0100 > >@@ -415,6 +415,8 @@ class HVMImageHandler(ImageHandler): > > else: > > ret.append('-nographic') > > > >+ if int(vmConfig['platform'].get('monitor', 0)) != 0: > >+ ret.append('-monitor vc') > > return ret > > > > def createDeviceModel(self, restore = False): > > > >The '-monitor vc' is already the default for QEMU, so both branches of > >that if end up reducing to the same functional state - the monitor being > >enabled. You need to explicitly disable the monitor if the config file > >has monitor=0 > > No, the monitor in qemu is off by default, the patch is correct as is. Is that a recent Xen-specific change to QEMU ? The regular QEMU has always had the monitor on by default - and its on by default in Xen 3.0.3/4 : http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/qemu-doc.html#SEC10 "-monitor dev Redirect the monitor to host device dev (same devices as the serial port). The default device is vc in graphical mode and stdio in non graphical mode." > >I'm not sure this patch is a good idea long term though. If, as Anthony > >suggests in previous thread, XenD takes control of the monitor and provides > >an explicit 'xm monitor' command, then it'll be impossible to also make > >the monitor also appear on a VC. > > > >This also doesn't address the issue that making the monitor appear on a > >VC is fundamentally a security risk and so can never be enabled in any > >production environment where you care about integrity of the Dom0 host. > >I don't see the point in introducing a config file setting which will > >have to go away once a sustainable 'xm monitor' patch is implemented. > > Why shouldn't both co-exist? You can have either monitor=pty or > monitor=vc. This is how serial ports work already. What I mean is that if we wanted to implement a 'xm monitor' command, then XenD would need to launch QEMU with '-monitor pty' (or equivalent) at which point you'd be unable to also have '-monitor vc' on the same command line. > >For the timescales involved in 3.0.5 I think we should instead make sure > >that 'xm block-configure' works correctly. > > How does it not work correctly? I've not had any trouble with it myself, but I've not tested it much. I was refering to the earlier mail in this thread http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2007-04/msg00222.html where Nishi indicated his motivation for wanting access to the monitor via a VC was that block-configure wasn't reliable. Dan. -- |=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=| |=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=| |=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=| |=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=| _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |