Hi, > > But let's say we go for a dedicated virtio-device to preserve this > > granularity. Should we aim at providing a generic virtio-msg device or > > should we keep this so-called wayland-specific virtio device (I'd like > > to remind you that it's actually protocol-agnostic)? > > Maybe there's another option (not sure I mentioned it previously): > de-correlate the message passing and fd-passing interfaces. If we add a > virtio-fd device that takes care of FD passing between guest and host, > we can still use a regular vsock to pass messages (can be vhost or > !vhost depending on your level of paranoïa). The wayland proxies would > then queue/dequeue messages to/from the vsock and FDs to/from virtio-fd.
Hmm, I suspect supporting unix socket passing (by creating a tunnel for them) is going to be tricky in with that approach. cheers, Gerd --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
