On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 05:10:27PM +0200, Philippe Berthault wrote: > Is there a notion of session in libvirt ? > > In other words, is it possible, between virConnectOpen() and > virConnectClose(), that some Xen domains will be started, stopped, > destroyed, etc.. by another operator using the xm command ou by another > binary command based on libvirt. yes > If the response is yes, is it possible to introduce a global lock in Xen > (or in libvirt ?) to avoid conflict between libvirt and xm command or > between several libvirt based commands. A global lock on Xen is not possible, libvirt connect to Xen only though an RPC (well in most cases) and any other app could do the same kind of RPC. I don't think having a lock is possible. And even if you had a lock a root process on domain 0 coul always do a direct hypervisor call for example to kill a domain. In a nutshell with the current (lack of) authentication in Xen you just can't garantee absence of conflict, and this is not a limitation coming from libvirt. Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | Red Hat http://redhat.com/ veillard@xxxxxxxxxx | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/