Currently, if the user doesn't pass a uuid, the system uuid is set to
all zeros. This patch generates a random one instead.
Is there a reason to prefer all zeros? If not, can a patch like this
one be applied?
Signed-off-by: Serge Hallyn <serge.hal...@canonical.com>
---
vl.c | 11 +++++++++++
1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c
index 112b0e0..2b53b62 100644
--- a/vl.c
+++ b/vl.c
@@ -247,7 +247,9 @@ int nb_numa_nodes;
uint64_t node_mem[MAX_NODES];
uint64_t node_cpumask[MAX_NODES];
+#include <uuid/uuid.h>
uint8_t qemu_uuid[16];
+bool uuid_set = false;
static QEMUBootSetHandler *boot_set_handler;
static void *boot_set_opaque;
@@ -3030,6 +3032,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
" Wrong format.\n");
exit(1);
}
+ uuid_set = true;
break;
case QEMU_OPTION_option_rom:
if (nb_option_roms >= MAX_OPTION_ROMS) {
@@ -3200,6 +3203,14 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
exit(0);
}
+ if (!uuid_set) {
+ uuid_t uuid;
+ uuid_generate(uuid);
+ for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ qemu_uuid[i] = uuid[i];
+ }
+ }
+
/* Open the logfile at this point, if necessary. We can't open the logfile
* when encountering either of the logging options (-d or -D) because the
* other one may be encountered later on the command line, changing the
--
1.7.9.1
