Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 13/17] xenconsoled: add support for up to 3 secondary consoles [and 1 more messages]

[Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Marek Marczykowski-Górecki writes ("Re: [RFC PATCH v2 13/17] xenconsoled: add 
support for up to 3 secondary consoles"):
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 05:31:18PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I'm confused.  I thought we already had support for multiple PV
> > consoles.  Is the problem that the backend is in qemu rather than
> > xenconsoled ?  
> 
> One of main reasons for this whole thing is to get rid of qemu from dom0
> at all. Regardless if it's handling only console, only disk or other
> stuff. This is a lot of code and I don't consider asking it nicely
> "please don't let rogue domain let attack any other qemu component" to
> be enough. 

That makes perfect sense.

I'm sorry my responses on this console stuff were so confused
yesterday.  I think I need to go back and read this lot again.

Stefano Stabellini writes ("Re: [RFC PATCH v2 13/17] xenconsoled: add support 
for up to 3 secondary consoles"):
> I haven't read this patch, but yes, it is as you wrote. Multiple PV
> consoles are only suppored by QEMU, with the interface described in
> docs/misc/console.txt. It could be nice to be able to support them with
> xenconsoled, but we need to be careful they don't conflict. There is a
> way to specify the desired console backend, either QEMU or xenconsoled,
> so it shouldn't be a problem to have both backends being able to do
> multiple consoles. But we wouldn't want to have a different interface
> from the one described in docs/misc/console.txt, otherwise we'll break
> existing guests (Linux for instance.)

Right.

Thanks,
Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel