qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 for 2.1 01/10] block: Auto-generate node_name


From: Jeff Cody
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 for 2.1 01/10] block: Auto-generate node_names for each BDS entry
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:13:28 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 02:53:15PM +0200, Benoît Canet wrote:
> The Tuesday 17 Jun 2014 à 17:53:49 (-0400), Jeff Cody wrote :
> > Currently, node_name is only filled in when done so explicitly by the
> > user.  If no node_name is specified, then the node name field is not
> > populated.
> > 
> > If node_names are automatically generated when not specified, that means
> > that all block job operations can be done by reference to the unique
> > node_name field.  This eliminates ambiguity in resolving filenames
> > (relative filenames, or file descriptors, symlinks, mounts, etc..) that
> > qemu currently needs to deal with.
> > 
> > If a node name is specified, then it will not be automatically
> > generated for that BDS entry.
> > 
> > If it is automatically generated, it will be prefaced with "__qemu##",
> > followed by 8 characters of a unique number, followed by 8 random
> > ASCII characters in the range of 'A-Z'.  Some sample generated node-name
> > strings:
> >     __qemu##00000000IAIYNXXR
> >     __qemu##00000002METXTRBQ
> >     __qemu##00000001FMBORDWG
> 
> Jeff can't we simply enforce the namespace separation with a check on the 
> QDict
> option content ?
> This way we could be sure that the user can't input a node-name starting with
> __qemu.
>

That still would not stop a user from trying to 'predict' or assuming
what a node name would be ("oh, it is the first drive, it is probably
__qemu##0000", etc...).  Having the combination of the incrementing
counter and the random string generation guarantees 2 things: it will
always be unique in a qemu session, and it is not predictable by the
user.  The "__qemu##" just helps to visually identify it as a qemu
generated.

Although if you are strictly concerned about namespace confusion, we
could enforce the namespace as you suggest, so a user could not create
a node-name that would look like a qemu-generated node-name.  Even in
that case, I would still want to keep the sequential number + random
string.

> > 
> > The prefix is to aid in identifying it as a qemu-generated name, the
> > numeric portion is to guarantee uniqueness in a given qemu session, and
> > the random characters are to further avoid any accidental collisions
> > with user-specified node-names.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>
> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Cody <address@hidden>
> > ---
> >  block.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/block.c b/block.c
> > index 43abe96..da32bb0 100644
> > --- a/block.c
> > +++ b/block.c
> > @@ -843,12 +843,26 @@ static int bdrv_open_flags(BlockDriverState *bs, int 
> > flags)
> >      return open_flags;
> >  }
> >  
> > +#define GEN_NODE_NAME_PREFIX    "__qemu##"
> > +#define GEN_NODE_NAME_MAX_LEN   (sizeof(GEN_NODE_NAME_PREFIX) + 8 + 8)
> >  static void bdrv_assign_node_name(BlockDriverState *bs,
> >                                    const char *node_name,
> >                                    Error **errp)
> >  {
> > +    char gen_node_name[GEN_NODE_NAME_MAX_LEN];
> > +    static uint32_t counter; /* simple counter to guarantee uniqueness */
> > +
> > +    /* if node_name is NULL, auto-generate a node name */
> >      if (!node_name) {
> > -        return;
> > +        int len;
> > +        snprintf(gen_node_name, GEN_NODE_NAME_MAX_LEN,
> > +                 "%s%08x", GEN_NODE_NAME_PREFIX, counter++);
> > +        len = strlen(gen_node_name);
> > +        while (len < GEN_NODE_NAME_MAX_LEN - 1) {
> > +            gen_node_name[len++] = g_random_int_range('A', 'Z');
> > +        }
> > +        gen_node_name[GEN_NODE_NAME_MAX_LEN - 1] = '\0';
> > +        node_name = gen_node_name;
> >      }
> >  
> >      /* empty string node name is invalid */
> > -- 
> > 1.9.3
> > 



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]