Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 01/13] mm/shmem: Introduce F_SEAL_GUEST

[Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 10:06:02AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 11/19/21 16:39, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > If qmeu can put all the guest memory in a memfd and not map it, then
> > > I'd also like to see that the IOMMU can use this interface too so we
> > > can have VFIO working in this configuration.
> > 
> > In QEMU we usually want to (and must) be able to access guest memory
> > from user space, with the current design we wouldn't even be able to
> > temporarily mmap it -- which makes sense for encrypted memory only. The
> > corner case really is encrypted memory. So I don't think we'll see a
> > broad use of this feature outside of encrypted VMs in QEMU. I might be
> > wrong, most probably I am:)
> 
> It's not _that_ crazy an idea, but it's going to be some work to teach KVM
> that it has to kmap/kunmap around all memory accesses.
> 
> I think it's great that memfd hooks are usable by more than one subsystem,
> OTOH it's fair that whoever needs it does the work---and VFIO does not need
> it for confidential VMs, yet, so it should be fine for now to have a single
> user.
> 
> On the other hand, as I commented already, the lack of locking in the
> register/unregister functions has to be fixed even with a single user.
> Another thing we can do already is change the guest_ops/guest_mem_ops to
> something like memfd_falloc_notifier_ops/memfd_pfn_ops, and the
> register/unregister functions to memfd_register/unregister_falloc_notifier.

I'm satisified with this naming ;)

> 
> Chao, can you also put this under a new CONFIG such as "bool MEMFD_OPS", and
> select it from KVM?

Yes, reasonable.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paolo