Description of problem: Failed to start second guest which use a shared nvdimm device Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): libvirt-5.6.0-4.module+el8.1.0+4160+b50057dc.x86_64 How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. prepare 2 guest with 1 shared nvdimm device: # virsh dumpxml vm1 <memory model='nvdimm' access='shared'> <source> <path>/tmp/nvdimm</path> <alignsize unit='KiB'>2048</alignsize> </source> <target> <size unit='KiB'>524288</size> <node>1</node> <label> <size unit='KiB'>128</size> </label> </target> <alias name='nvdimm0'/> <address type='dimm' slot='0'/> </memory> # virsh dumpxml vm2 <memory model='nvdimm' access='shared'> <source> <path>/tmp/nvdimm</path> <alignsize unit='KiB'>2048</alignsize> </source> <target> <size unit='KiB'>524288</size> <node>1</node> <label> <size unit='KiB'>128</size> </label> <readonly/> </target> <address type='dimm' slot='0'/> </memory> 2. start 2 guest # virsh start vm1 Domain vm1 started # virsh start vm2 error: Failed to start domain vm2 error: internal error: child reported (status=125): Requested operation is not valid: Setting different SELinux label on /tmp/nvdimm which is already in use 3. check nvdimm label: # ll -Z /tmp/nvdimm -rw-r--r--. 1 qemu qemu system_u:object_r:svirt_image_t:s0:c486,c699 536870912 Sep 5 04:37 /tmp/nvdimm # getfattr -m trusted.libvirt.security -d /tmp/nvdimm getfattr: Removing leading '/' from absolute path names # file: tmp/nvdimm trusted.libvirt.security.dac="+0:+0" trusted.libvirt.security.ref_dac="3" trusted.libvirt.security.ref_selinux="1" trusted.libvirt.security.selinux="unconfined_u:object_r:user_tmp_t:s0" trusted.libvirt.security.timestamp_dac="1567565944" trusted.libvirt.security.timestamp_selinux="1567565944" Actual results: Fail to start 2nd guest Expected results: Start success Additional info: from the qemu doc, when set share=on, the same nvdimm backend file could be shared with other guest: "share=on/off" controls the visibility of guest writes. If "share=on", then guest writes will be applied to the backend file. If another guest uses the same backend file with option "share=on", then above writes will be visible to it as well. If "share=off", then guest writes won't be applied to the backend file and thus will be invisible to other guests.
Also hit this issue when using pipe serial device. <serial type='pipe'> <source path='/mnt/pipe'/> <target type='pci-serial' port='0'> <model name='pci-serial'/> </target> <alias name='ua-600dc99f-3bb9-43c2-bf4c-1558d1e00512'/> <address type='pci' domain='0x0000' bus='0x02' slot='0x05' function='0x0'/> </serial> # virsh start test error: Failed to start domain test error: internal error: child reported (status=125): Requested operation is not valid: Setting different SELinux label on /mnt/pipe which is already in use
I think my seclabel remembering only uncovered the issue that was dormant. Previously, we relabeled the file without asking and thus effectively cut off the access for qemu that's running. It didn't caused much trouble because qemu did not repoen the NVMDIMM. What we should to is to introduce <seclabel/> element to <memory/> so that a different seclabel can be set (the same way we allow overriding seclabel for other devices). And as for the <serial/> - you need to specify a seclabel so that libvirt doesn't invent a new one (which fails obviously).
This issue also occurred for disk device with the same scenario, Han, would you please add a comment for the failure scenarios? Thx.
(In reply to Xuesong Zhang from comment #3) > This issue also occurred for disk device with the same scenario, Han, would > you please add a comment for the failure scenarios? Thx. After a analysis, the scenarios Han met is similar with the following BZ, so add scenarios there. Please ignore the above comment. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1740024#c9
After evaluating this issue, there are no plans to address it further or fix it in an upcoming release. Therefore, it is being closed. If plans change such that this issue will be fixed in an upcoming release, then the bug can be reopened.
Hi Michal, I reopen this bug since this issue still exists on libvirt-8.0.0-8.el9_0.x86_64 of rhel9.0. Could you help to confirm whether this bug should be fixed, if so, do you have plan to fix it? Thanks Liang Cong
Yes, this should be fixed. However, I have no timeframe yet.