On 10/25/12 14:27, Alon Levy wrote: > Signed-off-by: Alon Levy <al...@redhat.com>
Looks sane at a quick glance. But: how far we wanna take this? Add checks to qxl for each and every assert() guests can trigger in spice-server? So we end up sanity-checking everything twice long-term? I think instead we'll need a way for spice-server to report back errors to qxl. So spice-server would just notify qxl and go on (or stop processing until reset) instead of aborting. qxl in turn will notify the guest. [ The alternative would be to basically move server/red_parse_qxl.c into the qemu codebase. I don't think we want that because that would make a bunch of data structures which are spice-server internal today (for good reasons) a libspice-server ABI+API. ] cheers, Gerd
