lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Sep]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v7 00/14] KVM: mm: fd-based approach for supporting KVM guest private memory
From
On 8/18/22 06:24, Kirill A . Shutemov wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 10:40:12PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022, Chao Peng wrote:
>>> This is the v7 of this series which tries to implement the fd-based KVM
>>> guest private memory.
>>
>> Here at last are my reluctant thoughts on this patchset.
>>
>> fd-based approach for supporting KVM guest private memory: fine.
>>
>> Use or abuse of memfd and shmem.c: mistaken.
>>
>> memfd_create() was an excellent way to put together the initial prototype.
>>
>> But since then, TDX in particular has forced an effort into preventing
>> (by flags, seals, notifiers) almost everything that makes it shmem/tmpfs.
>>
>> Are any of the shmem.c mods useful to existing users of shmem.c? No.
>> Is MFD_INACCESSIBLE useful or comprehensible to memfd_create() users? No.
>>
>> What use do you have for a filesystem here? Almost none.
>> IIUC, what you want is an fd through which QEMU can allocate kernel
>> memory, selectively free that memory, and communicate fd+offset+length
>> to KVM. And perhaps an interface to initialize a little of that memory
>> from a template (presumably copied from a real file on disk somewhere).
>>
>> You don't need shmem.c or a filesystem for that!
>>
>> If your memory could be swapped, that would be enough of a good reason
>> to make use of shmem.c: but it cannot be swapped; and although there
>> are some references in the mailthreads to it perhaps being swappable
>> in future, I get the impression that will not happen soon if ever.
>>
>> If your memory could be migrated, that would be some reason to use
>> filesystem page cache (because page migration happens to understand
>> that type of memory): but it cannot be migrated.
>
> Migration support is in pipeline. It is part of TDX 1.5 [1]. And swapping
> theoretically possible, but I'm not aware of any plans as of now.
>
> [1] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/intel-trust-domain-extensions.html
>

This thing?

https://cdrdv2.intel.com/v1/dl/getContent/733578

That looks like migration between computers, not between NUMA nodes. Or
am I missing something?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-09-09 06:45    [W:0.361 / U:1.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site