Re: [libvirt] RFC: virtio-rng and /dev/urandom

2016-04-20 Thread Steve Grubb
On Friday, April 15, 2016 12:46:46 PM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 06:41:34AM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote: > > Libvirt currently rejects using host /dev/urandom as an input source for a > > virtio-rng device. The only accepted sources are /dev/random and > > /dev/hwrng. This i

Re: [libvirt] [PATCHv3] audit: Audit resources used by VirtIO RNG

2013-03-15 Thread Steve Grubb
On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 10:46:24 AM Peter Krempa wrote: > This patch adds auditing of resources used by Virtio RNG devices. Only > resources on the local filesystems are audited. Further testing revealed that I needed to make a some updates to the audit package to support this. The auvirt pr

Re: [libvirt] [PATCHv3] audit: Audit resources used by VirtIO RNG

2013-03-15 Thread Steve Grubb
/.libs/libvirtd" > > hostname=? addr=? terminal=pts/0 res=success' --- > > > > Notes: > > Version 3: > > - don't log non-local resources for EGD backend > > - change order of blocks of code to optimize > > > > Version 2

Re: [libvirt] [RFC PATCH 0/2] audit cgroup ACL actions in qemu

2011-02-16 Thread Steve Grubb
On Tuesday, February 15, 2011 09:59:59 pm Eric Blake wrote: > I'm following up on danpb's patches to add initial audit support to > qemu actions (see around commit 8dc136b in Oct 2010). Another useful > thing to audit is all changes to the device ACL whitelist via the > cgroup device controller -

[libvirt] Re: libvirt code review

2009-11-11 Thread Steve Grubb
On Tuesday 10 November 2009 07:00:36 am Daniel Veillard wrote: > > At line 2219 is an unusual if statement. Normally you do not see > > something constructed as (!cpu)<0). That would seem to have meant cpu>=0 > > which is more straightforward. > > if (def->cpumask && > !(cpus = virDom

[Libvir] Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?

2007-10-22 Thread Steve Grubb
On Monday 22 October 2007 09:47:12 Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Nevertheless, I don't think you're going to get rid of the competing SSL > libraries.  Rewriting code to use a different API is a lot of make-work > that no one wants to do, and doesn't contribute much benefit to anyone. This is true a