From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=209.85.216.43 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1792623741; b=GcWKNLnhNAO7RFZjMECEpbPfcQ2wk9PqZl/hKy2SGAIxragBkLCOpPm5H2LLkYIQMHTw 1zMaESwpY1Zv9aFpP1uxbbtK9ZdL9DfFZrcPUbGTNnhMVbkvZ1KXb6mj5b9VwT/vYqAL7 Bavf6D8zrzz+F856YRDJHCDbmsxrsSdQI8hPBSWIwEV9Lv5WSljPGjj8pm13jLJMmmZhB fVqjH3G3uFTbz6in7LkzBtg6LurA90x00K53Y18Hv+JhnqqHazmW6hD7bQx5/+QCCc6J8 MbWqxsuUxAyYIa2WnrfVWQIdtbhkk9uef1HzKgUGrq85XGf6wDcyJ3WFIZ62xbrGeZQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1792623741; h=DMARC-Filter:Received:DKIM-Signature:X-Google-DKIM-Signature: X-Forwarded-Encrypted:X-Gm-Message-State:X-Gm-Gg:X-Received:Received: Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:Content-Transfer-Encoding: In-Reply-To; bh=Rh1ct0ynFCJmpIeBgUsQvZu9SOoIsv6E2A9BdvVwioc=; b=yCepct9hF7IIm3ZPGMk/4+mO1RtvlALYw6yY3mhEjYsFNZnWOYqi7aIMVR8WfPVAhEiM IK8J7N3XRc1kZ8/L1y3lqW7G/vT4FIIZ9sBnexl7KzTyXYh9RaxFnWBmhznnCizG16WA2 DbQIQu68v7yiH9sH9pJRDMREnAZuPzQg7K8eJdUzpW9vl3inx10PwTXcORv+7XH8HlbjH sjpjrZkCrcBwiIkQDyp9xPWQNz7QO9LnOWyLbRJPnGcq6ULAkYvJeFfIxRqVas7A9lLec 9LOyLl1DPuCZfxGD+gc5rM9YW5n4jQqdgywq6gQbVABPSrkNHAlSCWysmSIs0+JScJQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=google.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20251104 header.b=PrvnbdxY; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=209.85.216.43 Received: from mail-pj1-f43.google.com (mail-pj1-f43.google.com [209.85.216.43]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E04E606A31E for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 23:02:21 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 2E04E606A31E Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20251104 header.b=PrvnbdxY Received: by mail-pj1-f43.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-3ace1f3897cso766549a91.0 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 16:02:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20251104; t=1792623740; x=1793228540; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :content-type:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from :date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=Rh1ct0ynFCJmpIeBgUsQvZu9SOoIsv6E2A9BdvVwioc=; b=PrvnbdxYLj3QtXcDyGCFvoPVP8HPcIPp1HlQ5x3LvhQ3qFnXyGg+FlMVDqecm4ALKV Ypw25BXaQgg4sYfLW6xZNNs/YVg4yTDKzt16OZkmuhFjYbyJoUSPlr4flrCEp8PLJg+v j8hd+8Cb2HqvKjNtr/UaTBOEGytNBfupJVqOtKVnd4a6hdeX7fvtUoTHCoikmS+SYM0o 3//TUqGXVRTu78WdTMS8V0ApnKHJ7SpZvg3DqiiwPSTi4loH8gAUGzZVjVaz9ismokZ8 md7AgSCMgZsilMttgP8aWXtKGzW1O3DvGE9WOpZPxliclZzog3SnaMQbMe9UzVQ6OmBX m5HA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1792623740; x=1793228540; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :content-type:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from :date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to:content-type; bh=Rh1ct0ynFCJmpIeBgUsQvZu9SOoIsv6E2A9BdvVwioc=; b=akz2EgFY9K8zBB5XN6o8bMjV0Hlrhu37YY6o/SBc9kotMUOGiR/CL/zbGuQCo3m4Pa +2joriqFzBBHwUrGXBd9/7rQgSd0SinkBSQlQ3KDS3RxyMbAlFRYwBAwCFeBkVoNtkab NK2nSnzwV6lufVLEpmiZ/ReTNUYoNQJfIp+9hEcZuyBmPdjf0qejCtSs/OnvXTFrfAZx YirEpItoc5z6mVJ9N9PoDSjXUdFkUqEDguow7SD4lFvP827A55i7tLD52uRkvqHwufZs 3c1suECJYJjiz6GJof3dVtaBLfEMJ1w7TpF9mkRnxH6hm22NOCHosVOj7OTwSufEq6aG XQrw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBwY4PmC1LKPtXHyyqyBrxAdZigw/iIARFak0ViXt0KOcIccG8KoI7itkYE4Ox+iRJ4yXpJeXw==@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AFq9FYJtNN3K4B7vTHV2pftVzdXlguuohxY2BxUXxWuLyJ0n1jYzDYZN ehbR86CKnIcx+/ot69Wvk0M7fCnRCxAHM2fpyfyiKxmkYts3JPxFHA8wwoSN8tukzg== X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou3Lm6hEZ7LwgI5fllY4HyR1iX0BVeFkauVpRYyeIlMvU9blGuEqCmxvCnDJgVB Y1DzmD6G/BuWPUX9BnctfQc4ioen9eV57YExFrCNBj5tNT6gsPcPTmWqf8B09GTj0ce8pKsWLcM myvgvPa33267rl62LMbFaoSgrgGykUVrmVpoLPK8l8F65HbdxU4sBvt8W83YKV4+fndecP5kWiZ hzZt9uCO84u6lLpGTIocXWdGI7cw6NwnhJIysQffe9700LjFili1RfA1zXj5b4kQZGiS4KYj+pi 52+7YYQ9phagHTLEi/K8BCu3CVbPnFepqA1zaVsx65dbQkLls0GQkJHSm8Hsm59luTVFQvjwXpL 3n47OfB1s5REXCE7oe+wMApQniB0fGc5JYsuzjmXlPvKhSivnsjFj4Mth9snHvZvrA2yApIGW+u RWvYpRV/DwHRMl/xLAn2t0GniqUPRRKjoOAgI3wbWMrhI5OWz6tposNu7Eropn2KZtJMY0/z/qp TMNPFu63aBjisDLE9JeraT1+5B2pgBZaPmGKGvjVGJ4PU5tH2nRSH6OduWEuO+TPjHhx21gnMmQ bkwfQWY750hv9XwMCj3ld2C+ByBmn3DaajWMPQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:2f85:b0:3ac:7c4d:8be6 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-3ad86d9e088mr2829501a91.40.1792623739843; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 16:02:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (64.75.127.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.127.75.64]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 98e67ed59e1d1-3ada4896c4dsm1314919a91.7.2026.10.21.16.02.17 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 21 Oct 2026 16:02:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2026 23:02:14 +0000 From: David Matlack To: Pasha Tatashin Cc: Tarun Sahu , Andrew Morton , joro@8bytes.org, Mike Rapoport , Pratyush Yadav , 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 , Bjorn Helgaas , 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 2/4] liveupdate: Select file handler by name in the preserve ioctl Message-ID: References: <20261021152527.375070-1-tarunsahu@google.com> <20261021152527.375070-3-tarunsahu@google.com> X-Mailing-List: iommu@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On 2026-10-21 01:17 PM, Pasha Tatashin wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2026 at 11:25 AM Tarun Sahu wrote: > > > > Currently luo_preserve_file() iterates over luo_file_handler_list and > > picks the first registered handler whose .can_preserve() callback > > returns true. When a subsystem introduces a new, backwards-incompatible > > file handler alongside an existing one for the same file type, userspace > > has no way to choose which handler preserves a file descriptor, nor can > > the kernel keep the existing rollback-safe handler as the default while > > allowing callers to opt into the new handler. > > That is not how it will work. If we are in the .can_preserve() call, > it means the user has already decided which file handlers to use. We > need to do that before any preservation happens; otherwise, we could > run into conflicts on FLBs i.e. FH of different version require > different FLBs. > > Therefore, there should be a luoctl call (i.e via a new ioctl to set > compatability) that provides the kernel with the specs file of the > target kernel we are updating to, allowing the kernel to select the > compatible file handlers. Since .can_preserve() is called when the > user is already preserving files, the specification must have already > been supplied, or the kernel should fall back to using the default > (i.e., latest) file handlers. I don't think that is the right direction. IMO the kernel should not be choosing which file handler to use, userspace should be. If userspace gets it wrong and chooses a file handler the next kernel does not support, that's on them. The problem with the kernel making a decision about file handlers is then userspace does not know what arguments to pass in. We are adding custom per-file handler arguments to PRESERVE_FD and RETRIEVE_FD. If the kernel is picking which file handler to use, say for a memfd, then userspace doesn't know which arguments to pass in. Sure you could add some method where userspace could query which file handlers are active and decide arguments based on that. But it feels backwards. I think a much cleaner solution is that userspace chooses file handler during PRESERVE_FD. I would even require it for RETRIEVE_FD so that we are guaranteed that the args the user is passing in are being sent to the right file handler. Passing to RETRIEVE_FD also opens the door to transforming across Live Update (similar to how AWS did LU from Xen to KVM as discussed at LPC). Regarding FLB conflicts, today we don't support multiple FLBs for the same global state, so there is nothing to conflict. Selecting a file handler during PRESERVE_FD doesn't change that. If we ever need to support multiple FLBs for the same global state (e.g. an incompatible change to the PCI FLB), we can add an ioctl that lets userspace select which FLB to use before preserving any files. After that, only file handlers registered with the selected FLB can be used to preserve files. PRESERVE_FD with any other file handler fails. That keeps the FLB decision up front and global, like you want, while still letting userspace pick the file handler for each fd. I'd also expect this to be rare, since FLB serialized state can use the same feature flags as everything else in this series.