On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:44:30 +0000, Justin Clift wrote: > On 15 Jan 2016, at 10:31, Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:23:03 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:11:18AM +0100, Jiri Denemark wrote: > >>> Kernel/initrd files are essentially read-only shareable images and thus > >>> should be handled in the same way. We already use the appropriate label > >>> for kernel/initrd files when starting a domain, but when a domain gets > >>> destroyed we would remove the labels which would make other running > >>> domains using the same files very unhappy. > >>> > >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=921135 > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> ACK > > > > Thanks, I pushed the patch. > > > >> but I'm wondering if the nvram and dtb lines before & after would > >> potentially suffer the same problem > > > > Yeah, I was wondering about that too, but I wasn't quite sure whether > > they are similar or not. > > Could Rich's test be tweaked some way in order to find out? Well, it could, but the question is whether it would be correct usage :-) And it seems nvram is actually different: /* This is different than kernel or initrd. The nvram store * is really a disk, qemu can read and write to it. */ and we use imagelabel for nvram. However, dtb (whatever that is used for) gets the same label we use for kernel/initrd so it looks like it could be similar. However, I have no idea what this beast is all about :-) Jirka -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list