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=-6.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 9B6FFC433F5 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 09:24:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C7E4611CA for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 09:24:13 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 3C7E4611CA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 94723900002; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 05:24:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 8CF156B0072; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 05:24:12 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 748EA900002; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 05:24:12 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0146.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.146]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EB1E6B0071 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 05:24:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin19.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D54CB2E4FB for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 09:24:11 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78592900302.19.094B9CA Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by imf09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4360F300010C for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 09:24:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1631784250; 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=0dHlztnaiRHcaPy45MsGDKnkv/q5nQ+if9oZqgd4ekg=; b=RlRtXQeKTQUM7vXPSng8fIHR/ERLFa9WEoiCay4mfWAWcfrjUFeNjxFt2mjL6iZRGn96Ee SkTwyf/rlVVQ8IXvxj+YIvMDeCbQweRy426jAD+aaEKRZ3JlyVvslOMe4z7X+V2pY9p7dl pTlWiKkxg+Q+iFgcC9LEBNpVqLUYy0o= Received: from mail-ed1-f69.google.com (mail-ed1-f69.google.com [209.85.208.69]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-589-IxTRnvOVPzygYzATkCVPqg-1; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 05:24:09 -0400 X-MC-Unique: IxTRnvOVPzygYzATkCVPqg-1 Received: by mail-ed1-f69.google.com with SMTP id y10-20020a056402270a00b003c8adc4d40cso4725380edd.15 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 02:24:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:to:cc:references:from:subject:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0dHlztnaiRHcaPy45MsGDKnkv/q5nQ+if9oZqgd4ekg=; b=uVhgH+fLFa9hMnH6KOdvSMtbm/4+mpLHYolEfMzwuDesh1FqzpYG4dxw+mSKlSXrp1 Io1oJRTC4604ErUedU7WTtuM9yB+twhR31tcO+qvpNGX3ncc8D2kjt4KbKxw3aq8GKAq FMZDV1nkkANJ+zsG2zJpOzHu6whVlZV9xFr+HZM6BBR68C2/8pcJdEDwa+hGjiAqnFaE KGX8WuC1pk9kn7MN9cC1kMKvxhkXKdF+txyB9Bge3AHte1VCi+D9FFsAdcbFER7FaFA7 ig9jvTpNTw3FWJoqm3NjtQqdTErpIdx9JIUkr8dwvOJWGGg1VbG6QAdMO+qEOGbA+o+v FuHg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5304kCVXme19m7fQvhK2NAZlWSsboSAQIsX1XUcfZT1m1X5zUlX3 yP2vaoiE+DAbLhlu19e6Zj3uwRZG7bqO7731ci+Mhaxxg2za2XgluSfOmkfXPGDe/AnqcZoaytB YZeLn4fSXKzU= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2653:: with SMTP id ar19mr5092605ejc.431.1631784248167; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 02:24:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzxSCHk9AOfST+otT+0wr2XQnUZQCly3Lf1LowqYXIayIW1WAv+zy/RvKF5ZgnYhDlPWePO4Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2653:: with SMTP id ar19mr5092579ejc.431.1631784247943; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 02:24:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:b07:6468:f312:c8dd:75d4:99ab:290a? ([2001:b07:6468:f312:c8dd:75d4:99ab:290a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n10sm954257ejk.86.2021.09.16.02.24.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 16 Sep 2021 02:24:07 -0700 (PDT) To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Chao Peng Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andy Lutomirski , Sean Christopherson , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Joerg Roedel , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov , Andrew Morton , Joerg Roedel , Andi Kleen , David Rientjes , Vlastimil Babka , Tom Lendacky , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Varad Gautam , Dario Faggioli , x86@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan , David Hildenbrand , Dave Hansen , Yu Zhang References: <20210824005248.200037-1-seanjc@google.com> <20210902184711.7v65p5lwhpr2pvk7@box.shutemov.name> <20210903191414.g7tfzsbzc7tpkx37@box.shutemov.name> <02806f62-8820-d5f9-779c-15c0e9cd0e85@kernel.org> <20210910171811.xl3lms6xoj3kx223@box.shutemov.name> <20210915195857.GA52522@chaop.bj.intel.com> <20210915141147.s4mgtcfv3ber5fnt@black.fi.intel.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [RFC] KVM: mm: fd-based approach for supporting KVM guest private memory Message-ID: <179fdb45-d8a4-9567-edfe-2168794f599e@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 11:24:05 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210915141147.s4mgtcfv3ber5fnt@black.fi.intel.com> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4360F300010C X-Stat-Signature: r1p5ep6kqhs4oofbj6wiptajb6c1bsqp Authentication-Results: imf09.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=RlRtXQeK; spf=none (imf09.hostedemail.com: domain of pbonzini@redhat.com has no SPF policy when checking 216.205.24.124) smtp.mailfrom=pbonzini@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com X-HE-Tag: 1631784251-761461 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 15/09/21 16:11, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: >> Would introducing memfd_unregister_guest() fix this? > I considered this, but it get complex quickly. >=20 > At what point it gets called? On KVM memslot destroy? >=20 > What if multiple KVM slot share the same memfd? Add refcount into memfd= on > how many times the owner registered the memfd? You will always have multiple KVM slots sharing the same memfd, because=20 memslots are SRCU-protected. So there will be multiple generations of=20 memslots around and unregistering must be delayed to after=20 synchronize_srcu (around the call to kvm_arch_commit_memory_region). So KVM could just call memfd_{,un}register_guest as many times as it=20 calls fdget/fput. Looking at your test device, it would be like the=20 following pseudo-patch: case GUEST_MEM_REGISTER: { struct fd memfd =3D fdget(arg); memfd_file =3D memfd.file; return memfd_register_guest(memfd_file->f_inode, file, &guest_ops, &guest_mem_ops); } case GUEST_MEM_UNREGISTER: { if (!memfd_file) return -EINVAL; + memfd_unregister_guest(memfd_file->f_inode, file); fput(memfd_file); memfd_file =3D NULL; guest_mem_ops =3D NULL; return 0; and shmem_unregister_guest would be something like struct shmem_inode_info *info =3D SHMEM_I(inode); if (WARN_ON_ONCE(info->guest_owner !=3D owner)) return; if (--info->guest_usage_count) return; info->guest_owner =3D NULL; info->guest_ops =3D NULL; Paolo > It would leave us in strange state: memfd refcount owners (struct KVM) = and > KVM memslot pins the struct file. Weird refcount exchnage program.