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=-6.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 553EEC433B4 for ; Tue, 18 May 2021 16:04:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F672610CB for ; Tue, 18 May 2021 16:04:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1344672AbhERQFl (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 May 2021 12:05:41 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:41437 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1344604AbhERQFk (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 May 2021 12:05:40 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1621353861; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=kvhpwM9B7CK7kJ1xdIZJIHz3ygVOfl53rrG0Yt4bYqA=; b=G1I8xRcRqfjmbR76Hdwa3VrjCBEmQu/7Yn1wuuBnZP4bI3zANXVDsBHFFZnpUJclCrhWz6 YNkoJQO5ugGLUR83OxXGkrh9lo3mwqusQnl/vMt8QQD6UTPgwm02N35lNJDoudwp0+pIij G/+qPdNk5vPUifPGDxZC1QqSfOBunyY= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-488-IwQiSyPUM-SHNa54cz5-nA-1; Tue, 18 May 2021 12:04:20 -0400 X-MC-Unique: IwQiSyPUM-SHNa54cz5-nA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26CE6800D55; Tue, 18 May 2021 16:04:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gondolin.fritz.box (ovpn-113-74.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.74]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F00385DEAD; Tue, 18 May 2021 16:04:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 18:04:11 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck To: Claudio Imbrenda Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com, thuth@redhat.com, pasic@linux.ibm.com, david@redhat.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/11] KVM: s390: pv: implement lazy destroy Message-ID: <20210518180411.4abf837d.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20210518173624.13d043e3@ibm-vm> References: <20210517200758.22593-1-imbrenda@linux.ibm.com> <20210518170537.58b32ffe.cohuck@redhat.com> <20210518173624.13d043e3@ibm-vm> Organization: Red Hat GmbH MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 18 May 2021 17:36:24 +0200 Claudio Imbrenda wrote: > On Tue, 18 May 2021 17:05:37 +0200 > Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > On Mon, 17 May 2021 22:07:47 +0200 > > Claudio Imbrenda wrote: > > > This means that the same address space can have memory belonging to > > > more than one protected guest, although only one will be running, > > > the others will in fact not even have any CPUs. > > > > Are those set-aside-but-not-yet-cleaned-up pages still possibly > > accessible in any way? I would assume that they only belong to the > > in case of reboot: yes, they are still in the address space of the > guest, and can be swapped if needed > > > 'zombie' guests, and any new or rebooted guest is a new entity that > > needs to get new pages? > > the rebooted guest (normal or secure) will re-use the same pages of the > old guest (before or after cleanup, which is the reason of patches 3 > and 4) Took a look at those patches, makes sense. > > the KVM guest is not affected in case of reboot, so the userspace > address space is not touched. 'guest' is a bit ambiguous here -- do you mean the vm here, and the actual guest above?