qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

[Qemu-devel] Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/10] virtagent: host/guest RPC communicat


From: Michael Roth
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/10] virtagent: host/guest RPC communication agent
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 09:41:57 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.2.11) Gecko/20101013 Thunderbird/3.1.5

On 10/23/2010 06:31 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
On 10/22/2010 08:45 PM, Michael Roth wrote:
This set of patches is meant to be applied on top of the Virtproxy v1
patchset.

OVERVIEW:

There are a wide range of use cases motivating the need for a guest
agent of some sort to extend the functionality/usability/control
offered by QEMU. Some examples include graceful guest shutdown/reboot
and notifications thereof, copy/paste syncing between host/guest,
guest statistics gathering, file access, etc.

Ideally these would all be served by a single, easilly extensible
agent that can be deployed in a wide range of guests. Virtagent is an
XMLRPC server integrated into the Virtproxy guest daemon and aimed at
providing this type of functionality.

This code is very rough, and I'll to document most of the
bugs/shortcomings we're aware of in this version of the patchset. The
main goal of this RFC to get feedback on the types of core
functionality we would need in an agent of this sort, as well as
feedback on the general approach/architecture implemented here. Any
feedback is greatly appreciated however.

To start off this discussion, there have been some recent posts about
how much an agent of this sort overlaps with the goals of the Matahari
project (https://fedorahosted.org/matahari/). While both of these
approaches are at least *feasible*, our use cases require


the ability to deploy to guests which may not support virtio-serial,
which currently rules Matahari out.

Possibly there has been some miscommunication, Matahari does not require
virtio-serial.

It will be possible to configure Matahari to use virtio-serial if it
exists, but like Virtproxy it can also be used over a regular IP network
(yes, its transparent to clients too).


Sorry, I'm aware of this but wasn't very clear here. I was speaking in the context of our cloud, or other environments where there isn't any network access between the host and the guest. This essentially leaves virtio-serial and isa-serial, and a large number of our guests don't support the former.

-- Andrew




reply via email to

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