[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: Universal encryption on QEMU I/O channels

From: Markus Armbruster
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: Universal encryption on QEMU I/O channels
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 14:49:58 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)

"Daniel P. Berrange" <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 01:43:12PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 04/02/2015 12:32, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> > So my idea would be that we define a QEMUChannel object and set of APIs to
>> > standardize all interaction with sockets, pipes, RDMA, whatever $channel,
>> > and then convert the QEMU features I've mentioned over to use that. I think
>> > that would be simpler than trying to untangle QEMUFile code from migration
>> > and then extend its features.
>> Could it be GIOChannel simply?
>> 1) Chardev is already mostly a wrapper around GIOChannel
>> 2) NBD and VNC could be converted to GIOChannel with relative ease
>> 3) migration is more complicated because (unlike everything else) it
>> uses a separate thread and blocking sockets, but you could probably
>> write a GIOChannel-based implementation of QEMUFile.
> It might be possible to base it on GIOChannel, but IIRC some of the
> migration code was using iovecs for I/O and GIOChannel API doesn't
> allow for that. So you'd have to sacrifice performance by issuing a
> separate syscall for each iovec element which seems sucky to me.
> If you think that's an acceptable limitation though, I could certainly
> explore use of GIOChannel.
> More broadly speaking GIOChannel has fallen out of favour in the
> glib ecosystem, with most apps/libraries more focused on use of
> the GIO APIs instead, but IIUC QEMU avoids use of the GIO library
> due to need to support older glib versions.

Remind me: what GLib version are we targeting, and why?


reply via email to

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