From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=3.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_12_24, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E5E6C282DA for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 03:03:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63C742184B for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 03:03:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2387893AbfDRDDX (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Apr 2019 23:03:23 -0400 Received: from mga07.intel.com ([134.134.136.100]:64717 "EHLO mga07.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731985AbfDRDDX (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Apr 2019 23:03:23 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Apr 2019 20:03:22 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,364,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="143661253" Received: from local-michael-cet-test.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.239.159.128]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 Apr 2019 20:03:21 -0700 Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 17:59:18 +0800 From: Yang Weijiang To: pbonzini@redhat.com Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Migration for SPP(Sub-Page Protection) bitmaps Message-ID: <20190417095918.GA15982@local-michael-cet-test.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org Hi, Paolo, I'm working on migration support for SPP(Sub-Page Protection) feature, the previous patch set is here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/11/30/574, basically it's used to protect 128-byte subpages within a normal 4KB page. but I'm not sure whether we need to add migration support for such kind of feature. Currently, my solution is to store the SPP bitmaps to destination KVM, when there's EPT violation, search the bitmap mapping table to check if the guest page needs to be protected. Another solution is to setup EPT table directly at the end of migration. Do you have perferred approach? Thanks for your comments!