On (Tue) Sep 22 2009 [12:14:04], Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 01:30:10 am Alan Cox wrote:
> > > The interface presented to guest userspace is of a simple char
> > > device, so it can be used like this:
> > >
> > > fd = open("/dev/vcon2", O_RDWR);
> > > ret = read(fd, buf, 100);
> > > ret = write(fd, string, strlen(string));
> > >
> > > Each port is to be assigned a unique function, for example, the
> > > first 4 ports may be reserved for libvirt usage, the next 4 for
> > > generic streaming data and so on. This port-function mapping
> > > isn't finalised yet.
> >
> > Unless I am missing something this looks completely bonkers
> >
> > Every time we have a table of numbers for functionality it ends in
> > tears. We have to keep tables up to date and managed, we have to
> > administer the magical number to name space.
>
> The number comes from the ABI; we need some identifier for the different
> ports. Amit started using names, and I said "just use numbers"; they have
> to be documented and agreed by all clients anyway.
>
> ie. the host says "here's a port id 7", which might be the cut & paste
> port or whatever.
Yeah; port 0 has to be reserved for a console (and then we might need
to do a bit more for multiple consoles -- hvc operates on a 'vtermno',
so we need to allocate them as well).
Also, a 'name' property can be attached to ports, as has been suggested:
qemu ... -device virtconport,name=org.qemu.clipboard,port=3,...
spawns a port at id 3 and the guest will also place a file:
/sys/class/virtio-console/vcon3/name
which has "org.qemu.clipboard" as contents, so udev scripts could
create a symlink:
/dev/vcon/org.qemu.clipboard -> /dev/vcon3
Amit
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
