linux-kernel - Re: discuss about pvpanic

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 8 Jan 2020 11:05:02 +0100
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@...hat.com>,
        zhenwei pi <pizhenwei@...edance.com>
Cc:     "yelu@...edance.com" <yelu@...edance.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, qemu-devel@...gnu.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "libvir-list@...hat.com" <libvir-list@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: discuss about pvpanic

On 08/01/20 10:58, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>> the kernel-side patch certainly makes sense.  I assume that you want the
>> event to propagate up from QEMU to Libvirt and so on?  The QEMU patch
>> would need to declare a new event (qapi/misc.json) and send it in
>> handle_event (hw/misc/pvpanic.c).  For Libvirt I'm not familiar, so I'm
>> adding the respective list.
> 
> Adding an event is fairly easy, if everything you want libvirt to do is
> report the event to upper layers. I volunteer to do it. Question is, how
> qemu is going to report this, whether some attributes to GUEST_PANICKED
> event or some new event.

I think it should be a new event, using GUEST_PANICKED could cause upper
layers to react by shutting down or rebooting the guest.

Thanks,

Paolo