From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Xiao Guangrong Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 00/18] VM introspection Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 11:34:51 +0800 Message-ID: <310d60aa-9979-cb73-058d-831ca6b98dfa@gmail.com> References: <20171218190642.7790-1-alazar@bitdefender.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Paolo Bonzini , =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Xiao Guangrong , =?UTF-8?Q?Mihai_Don=c8=9bu?= To: =?UTF-8?Q?Adalber_Laz=c4=83r?= , kvm@vger.kernel.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20171218190642.7790-1-alazar@bitdefender.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 12/19/2017 03:06 AM, Adalber Lazăr wrote: > From: Adalbert Lazar > > This patch series proposes a VM introspection subsystem for KVM (KVMI). > > The previous RFC can be read here: https://marc.info/?l=kvm&m=150514457912721 > > These patches were tested on kvm/master, > commit 43aabca38aa9668eee3c3c1206207034614c0901 (Merge tag 'kvm-arm-fixes-for-v4.15-2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvmarm/kvmarm into HEAD). > > In this iteration we refactored the code based on the feedback received > from Paolo and others. I am thinking if we can define some check points in KVM where BPF programs are allowed to attach, then employ the policies in BPFs instead... -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org