qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V20 8/8] Add fd parameter for TPM passthrough dr


From: Stefan Berger
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V20 8/8] Add fd parameter for TPM passthrough driver
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:14:56 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120911 Thunderbird/15.0.1

On 01/18/2013 01:18 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 01/18/2013 09:02 AM, Stefan Berger wrote:
Enable the passing of a file descriptor via fd=<..> to access the host's
TPM device using the TPM passthrough driver.
Do we still need this, or is it sufficient to use path=/dev/fdset/nnn,
so that we are reusing common fd passing mechanisms without inventing
yet more variants?

Well, it's similar to -netdev tap,fd=27,id=xyz


+++ b/qapi-schema.json
@@ -3033,11 +3033,13 @@
  #
  # @cancel_path: #optional Path to TPM backend device's cancel sysfs entry
  #
+# @fd: #optional File descriptor for the TPM backend device
+#
  # Since: 1.5.0
  ##
  { 'type': 'TPMInfo',
    'data': {'model': 'str', 'id': 'str', 'type': 'str', '*path': 'str',
-           '*cancel_path': 'str' } }
+           '*cancel_path': 'str', '*fd' : 'int' } }
Besides, what integer value would you use for fd?  Older commands that
support fd passing did so via 'int' on the command line, but via a 'str'
via QMP (the name associated with the fd when using 'getfd'), since QMP
does not have a way to expose _which_ fd is the right number from qemu's

When libvirt forks, the child process inherits the file descriptors, among them those of the taps and /dev/tpm0. The subsequent execve keeps the file descriptor open. QEMU then reads the TPM file descriptor from the command line into above TPMInfo->fd. This also works with 'exec 100<>/dev/tpm0' via command line. Similar to the SELinux labeling of all the other file descriptors I also use the one for the TPM device for SELinux labeling.

perspective (it's not necessarily the same fd as in the management process).

Hm.

I think this patch should just be dropped.


Regards,
    Stefan




reply via email to

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