lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [May]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: Rename restrictedmem => guardedmem? (was: Re: [PATCH v10 0/9] KVM: mm: fd-based approach for supporting KVM)
On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 5:55 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
>
> ...
> My preference is to make it a VM-scoped ioctl(), if it ends up being a KVM ioctl()
> and not a common syscall. If the file isn't tightly coupled to a single VM, then
> punching a hole is further complicated by needing to deal with invalidating multiple
> regions that are bound to different @kvm instances. It's not super complex, but
> AFAICT having the ioctl() be system-scoped doesn't add value, e.g. I don't think
> having one VM own the memory will complicate even if/when we get to the point where
> VMs can share "private" memory, and the gmem code would still need to deal with
> grabbing a module reference.

Copyless migration would be a scenario where "private" memory may need
to be shared between source and target VMs depending on how migration
support is implemented.

Regards,
Vishal

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-05-06 03:18    [W:0.134 / U:0.956 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site