Sorry for late response. On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 14:46:08 +0000 "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 04:25:27PM +0900, Taku Izumi wrote: > > Hi Osier-san, Daniel-san, and all, > > > > This patchset adds an option for KVM guests to retain arbitrary capabilities. > > The previous versions are here: > > http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2011-December/msg00857.html > > http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2011-December/msg00950.html > > Can you give me a little more detail on why you need to make KVM > keep certain capabilities. > > In your first message you mention that you need to have 'rawio' for > QEMU ? Yes. > I am now wondering if we should do this in a different way. ie if > there is some XML configuration parameter for the <disk> that > indicates the need for rawio, then libvirt could automatically > ensures that we add CAP_SYS_RAWIO when starting QEMU. I see. You say if a guest has the following XML configuration, "CAP_SYS_RAWIO" capability is automatically added to it, right? <disk type='block' device='lun'> > > Likewise with type=ethernet, we could probably give QEMU the > CAP_SYS_NETADMIN capability. > > To me this feels nicer directly exposing capabilities in the > XML, since these are really an internal impl detail, not a > guest configuration thing. > -- Best regards, Taku Izumi <izumi.taku@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list