Re: [PATCH v6 2/6] x86/tdx: Support vmalloc() for tdx_enc_status_changed()

Dave Hansen
2023-05-23T21:33:09Z

On 5/23/23 14:25, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> There are consequences for converting pages between shared and private.
>> Doing it on a vmalloc() mapping is guaranteed to fracture the underlying
>> EPT/SEPT mappings.
>>
>> How does this work with load_unaligned_zeropad()? Couldn't it be
>> running around poking at one of these vmalloc()'d pages via the direct
>> map during a shared->private conversion before the page has been accepted?
> Would it be feasible and sensible to add a GFP_SHARED or whatever, to communicate
> to the core allocators that the page is destined to be converted to a shared page?
> I assume that would provide a common place (or two) for initiating conversions,
> and would hopefully allow for future optimizations, e.g. to keep shared allocation
> in the same pool or whatever. Sharing memory without any intelligence as to what
> memory is converted is going to make both the guest and host sad.

I don't think we want a GFP flag. This is still way too specialized to
warrant one of those.

It sounds like a similar problem to what folks want for modules or BPF.
There are a bunch of allocations that are related and can have some of
their setup/teardown costs amortized if they can be clumped together.

For BPF, the costs are from doing RW=>RO in the kernel direct map, and
fracturing it in the process.

Here, the costs are from the private->shared conversions and fracturing
both the direct map and the EPT/SEPT.

I just don't know if there's anything that we can reuse from the BPF effort.