"Michael S. Tsirkin" <[email protected]> writes:

> On Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 03:26:23PM +0200, Christian Speich wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 09:08:47AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 01:49:55PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>> > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 08:15:20AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> > > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 12:33:26PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>> > > > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 04:07:19PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 04:30:53PM +0200, Christian Speich wrote:
>> > > > > > > This removes the change introduced in [1] that prevents the use 
>> > > > > > > of
>> > > > > > > vhost-user-device and vhost-user-device-pci on unpatched QEMU 
>> > > > > > > builds.
>> > > > > > > 
>> > > > > > > [1]: 6275989647efb708f126eb4f880e593792301ed4
>> > > > > > > 
>> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Speich <[email protected]>
>> > > > > > > ---
>> > > > > > > vhost-user-device and vhost-user-device-pci started out as user
>> > > > > > > creatable devices. This was changed in [1] when the 
>> > > > > > > vhost-user-base was
>> > > > > > > introduced.
>> > > > > > > 
>> > > > > > > The reason given is to prevent user confusion. Searching 
>> > > > > > > qemu-discuss or
>> > > > > > > google for "vhost-user-device" I've seen no confused users.
>> > > > > > > 
>> > > > > > > Our use case is to provide wifi emulation using 
>> > > > > > > "vhost-user-device-pci",
>> > > > > > > which currently is working fine with the QEMU 9.0.2 present in 
>> > > > > > > Ubuntu
>> > > > > > > 24.04. With newer QEMU versions we now need to patch, distribute 
>> > > > > > > and
>> > > > > > > maintain our own QEMU packages, which is non-trivial.
>> > > > > > > 
>> > > > > > > So I want to propose lifting this restriction to make this 
>> > > > > > > feature
>> > > > > > > usable without a custom QEMU.
>> > > > > > > 
>> > > > > > > [1]: 6275989647efb708f126eb4f880e593792301ed4
>> > > > > > 
>> > > > > > The confusion is after someone reuses the ID you are claiming 
>> > > > > > without
>> > > > > > telling anyone and then linux guests will start binding that 
>> > > > > > driver to
>> > > > > > your device.
>> > > > > > 
>> > > > > > 
>> > > > > > We want people doing this kind of thing to *at a minimum*
>> > > > > > go ahead and register a device id with the virtio TC,
>> > > > > > but really to write and publish a spec.
>> > > > > 
>> > > > > Wanting people to register a device ID is a social problem and
>> > > > > we're trying to apply a technical hammer to it, which is rarely
>> > > > > an productive approach.
>> > > > > 
>> > > > > If we want to demonstrate that vhost-user-device is "risky", then
>> > > > > how about we rename it to have an 'x-' prefix and thus disclaim
>> > > > > any support for it, but none the less allow its use. Document it
>> > > > > as an experimental device, and if it breaks, users get to keep
>> > > > > both pieces.
>> > > > 
>> > > > Maybe with the insecure tag you are working on?
>> > > 
>> > > Sure.
>> > > 
>> > > > And disable in the default config?
>> > > 
>> > > Disabling in default config would retain the very problem that Christian
>> > > is trying to solve - that no distro would have the functionality 
>> > > available
>> > > for users.
>> > 
>> > I think his problem is that he has to patch qemu.
>> 
>> Yes I'm trying to avoid that. Patching qemu also involes providing updates
>> (and security patches!) for it. This is a very high burden to turn this
>> simple flag on.
>> 
>> > 
>> > As described, this is a developer option not an end user one.
>> 
>> I don't really get the distintion between developer and end user here.
>> 
>> As a developer I'm an end user too, I'm concerned with the linux kernel
>> and the additional host tooling for mac80211_hwsim support but QEMU
>> I'm just using as an user.
>> 
>> Greetings,
>> Christian
>
> Are you ok with building qemu with an extra config flag?

In my patch I gated the feature on:

  VHOST_USER_TEST

so it's easy to patch out of the default config.

>
>
>
>> > 
>> > 
>> > I know Red Hat will disable it anyway - we support what we ship.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > > With regards,
>> > > Daniel
>> > > -- 
>> > > |: https://berrange.com      -o-    
>> > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
>> > > |: https://libvirt.org         -o-            
>> > > https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
>> > > |: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    
>> > > https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
>> > 
>> > 

-- 
Alex Bennée
Virtualisation Tech Lead @ Linaro

Reply via email to