[Libvir] A question about libvirt usage
veillard at redhat.com
Tue Jun 13 15:54:40 UTC 2006
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.
> 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 Veillard | Red Hat http://redhat.com/
veillard at redhat.com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
More information about the libvir-list