From: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
To: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
Cc: tarunsahu@google.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
joro@8bytes.org, Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>,
maz@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, jgg@nvidia.com,
robin.murphy@arm.com, loganodell@google.com, oupton@kernel.org,
kevin.tian@intel.com, alex@shazbot.org, dwmw2@infradead.org,
pbonzini@redhat.com, seanjc@google.com, will@kernel.org,
Alexander Graf <graf@amazon.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, sagis@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
skhawaja@google.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] liveupdate: Replace compatibility string with a 2-bit pair feature header
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2026 20:49:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <at-8vkVpN2SF3XgB@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+CK2bDXDWbww_d3sD6OZqpo37V1a3t76_ubbrXLQS=9DB3dWA@mail.gmail.com>
On 2026-10-25 04:38 PM, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2026 at 9:50 AM David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com> wrote:
> > Sure but why deal with all the complexity just to save 8 bytes? All of
> > these structs are allocated on folios and there are kilobytes of unused
> > space to fit this header. And even if we optimize that we are talking
> > about 8 bytes per FH/FLB... or 16 bytes for structs with arch-specific
> > sub-structs like the KVM ones.
>
> The reason I care about keeping the header compact is that we are
> defining a foundational kernel ABI and want to use this header across
> almost every serialized data structure so we can evolve them later
> without breaking compatibility. While some top-level structs are on
> sparse folios today, other serialized structs are tightly packed, and
> we are looking to add KHO slab support in the future where tightly
> packed allocations will be common.
My intuition is we will have a small number of headers per preserved
file and per preserved FLB. One for the top-level struct and then
optionally a few more for sub-structs like arch-specific data. That is
why I am less worried 8 bytes per header, even if we fix the folio
problem.
Maybe where our visions differ is when there are collections of
serialized structs, like KHO blocks. For collections I don't think the
elements will each have their own headers. Otherwise the elements could
be different sizes.
Instead I think the struct that owns the collection will have a header
that includes features for fields in the elements. The header defines
which fields in all elements are valid. The field contents then convey
the per-element information (which might include 0 or -1 values to
convey this specific element doesn't have this data).
> That said, in your proposal, as long as nr_flags == 0 is allowed when
> a struct has no feature flags yet, luo_ser_hdr_size(hdr) is already 8
> bytes and only grows to 16 bytes on the first feature flag. I am OK
> with that.
Yeah the header will be 8 bytes until the first flag is defined, at
which point it will grow to 16 bytes.
Great, sounds like we are aligned on the header. s/luo/kho also sounds
good to me.
> > > This is not an issue on the incoming path, we never cast incoming data
> > > to struct name##_hdr or access ->payload directly. Instead, we parse
> > > the incoming buffer, dynamically compute the header size from the
> > > continuation bits, and cast the payload offset to "struct name *"
> > > based on the negotiated feature flags.
> >
> > How?
> >
> > This is the only data structure that describes the header. Are you
> > saying the incoming path will parse the header purely with a void *? Or
> > use this header but just be careful not to access payload?
> >
> > We should have one header structure that can be used on the incoming and
> > outgoing path. We should not have one header data structure that can be
> > used on the outgoing path and one that can be used on the incoming
> > path.
> >
> > Also we need a standard header that can be shared across all structs,
> > not a per struct header. Otherwise you will need to do weird casting and
> > overlays to implement the shared helper routines that parse it.
>
> Having DECLARE_KHO_SER_WRAP() in include/linux/kho/abi/ makes it
> immediately clear just by looking at kho/abi/ which serialized structs
> have the versioned header and which do not, while also enforcing the
> header when preserving and static-asserting the combined struct size a
> compile time.
>
> So with your header (and let's use KHO as we want to version KHO
> structs as well):
>
> struct kho_ser_hdr {
> __u32 size; /* Size of header + payload in bytes */
> __u32 nr_flags; /* Number of features encoded in flags[] */
> __u64 flags[];
> };
>
> The wrapped struct will look like:
>
> #define DECLARE_KHO_SER_WRAP(name, expected_size, nr_feats) \
> struct name##_wrap { \
> __u32 size; \
> __u32 nr_flags; \
> __u64 flags[DIV_ROUND_UP(nr_feats, 32)]; \
> struct name payload; \
> }; \
> static_assert(sizeof(struct name##_wrap) == (expected_size), \
> "struct " #name " size mismatch!")
>
> On the incoming kernel we don't use struct name##_wrap, but we use
> struct kho_ser_hdr for the wrapped data, validate the flags, and
> unwrap it via kho_ser_payload(hdr) to get back the struct name *
> payload type.
I still think it's not advisable to define name##_wrap since anyone
could accidentally start using it on the incoming path and we wouldn't
notice at first (especially since same kernel Live Update tests would
keep working totally fine). I also don't think asserting the combined
size buys us anything. The header size is just a function of the
number of features, and what we are trying to protect against is
structs embedded in the payload changing size.
So I would just do:
/* Marks struct name as a KHO serialized payload with a kho_ser_hdr. */
#define DECLARE_KHO_SER(name, payload_size) \
static_assert(sizeof(struct name) == (payload_size))
DECLARE_KHO_SER(luo_memfd_ser, 16);
Plus helpers that allocate and initialize the header and return the
payload as a typed pointer. Both the outgoing and incoming paths find
the payload the same way, by computing its offset from the header,
rather than through a struct with a fixed payload offset:
/* outgoing */
hdr = kho_ser_alloc(luo_memfd_ser, LUO_MEMFD_NR_FEATS);
ser = kho_ser_payload(hdr, luo_memfd_ser);
/* incoming */
hdr = phys_to_virt(args->serialized_data);
ser = kho_ser_payload(hdr, luo_memfd_ser);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-26 20:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-21 15:25 [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] liveupdate: Feature header ABI and named handler Tarun Sahu
2026-10-21 15:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] liveupdate: Rename handler compatible to name Tarun Sahu
2026-10-21 17:11 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-21 18:16 ` tarunsahu
2026-10-21 19:11 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-21 19:35 ` tarunsahu
2026-10-23 7:44 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-10-23 21:51 ` tarunsahu
2026-10-21 15:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] liveupdate: Select file handler by name in the preserve ioctl Tarun Sahu
2026-10-21 17:17 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-21 23:02 ` David Matlack
2026-10-22 1:14 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-22 17:57 ` David Matlack
2026-10-22 12:50 ` tarunsahu
2026-10-22 13:42 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-21 15:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] liveupdate: Replace compatibility string with a 2-bit pair feature header Tarun Sahu
2026-10-21 17:27 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-21 17:40 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-10-21 17:55 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-21 18:40 ` tarunsahu
2026-10-21 18:46 ` David Matlack
2026-10-21 18:50 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-21 23:28 ` David Matlack
2026-10-22 1:26 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-22 2:57 ` David Matlack
2026-10-22 3:32 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-22 3:52 ` David Matlack
2026-10-22 4:11 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-22 17:51 ` David Matlack
2026-10-22 20:53 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-23 13:50 ` David Matlack
2026-10-25 20:38 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-26 20:49 ` David Matlack [this message]
2026-10-21 23:55 ` David Matlack
2026-10-22 0:04 ` David Matlack
2026-10-26 11:50 ` tarunsahu
2026-10-26 21:14 ` David Matlack
2026-10-26 23:28 ` tarunsahu
2026-10-27 0:01 ` David Matlack
2026-10-27 0:55 ` Tarun Sahu
2026-10-27 3:26 ` David Matlack
2026-10-21 15:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] mm: memfd_luo: Add the " Tarun Sahu
2026-10-21 17:38 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-21 23:18 ` David Matlack
2026-10-22 0:41 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-22 2:51 ` David Matlack
2026-10-22 3:50 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-10-22 15:26 ` sashiko-bot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=at-8vkVpN2SF3XgB@google.com \
--to=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex@shazbot.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=graf@amazon.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=loganodell@google.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pratyush@kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=sagis@google.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=skhawaja@google.com \
--cc=tarunsahu@google.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox