qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] net: Allow specifying ifname for qemu-bridge-he


From: Mike Lovell
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] net: Allow specifying ifname for qemu-bridge-helper
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 12:04:15 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120912 Thunderbird/15.0.1

On 10/12/2012 02:32 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
On 12.10.2012 10:49, Mike Lovell wrote:
      /* request a tap device, disable PI, and add vnet header support if
-     * requested and it's available. */
-    prep_ifreq(&ifr, "tap%d");
+     * requested and it's available. use ifname if provided for tap name. */
+    prep_ifreq(&ifr, ifname != NULL ? ifname : "tap%d");
Should we check for special symbols here? prep_ifreq() does this:

     snprintf(ifr->ifr_name, IFNAMSIZ, "%s", ifname);

so at least it ensures we have length constraint.

I tried the code as is with specifying ifnames with various random combinations of special characters. Some of them we just allowed through, some caused an error when initializing the tap device, and some cause problems in the shell invoking qemu. I think the linux kernel does the necessary checking during the TUNSETIFF ioctl and the qemu-bridge-helper exits with an error if there was a problem.

Actually I'm not so sure anymore this is a good idea.
For example, system may have firewall (iptables) rules
in place for, say, future ppp interfaces for ppp clients,
and this way we may request the interface to be named
pppX and be allowed to send packets where we don't usually
have access to.

While I admit this does have that possibility, I'm not sure its a qemu problem. I don't know what the original motivation for the request was but I could see this being the reason for the request. Some administrator sets up firewall rules for a variety of guests ahead of actually running them and needs to specify the interface at runtime. Also, without using the helper programs, the qemu already allows specifying arbitrary names such as ppp0.

Maybe - at least - require some common prefix for the
interfaces created this way, so we'll live in our own,
easily distinguishable namespace -- like, qvif* (from
Qemu Virtual InterFace)?

I do like the idea of using a common prefix for the default name of tap devices. Something like "qvif%d" instead of "tap%d" in tap initialization code. But something tells me this could break compatibility with external management software where something might be expecting the interface name to start with tap.

mike



reply via email to

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