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 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D608C25B7E for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 07:13:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sEOMU-0000tM-1v; Tue, 04 Jun 2024 03:13:38 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sEOMS-0000ss-Mf for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Jun 2024 03:13:36 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sEOMQ-0004EF-NK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Jun 2024 03:13:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1717485213; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=nEQHZb7BAPTVXF5yyJ1m8X0KsNdaOaLytAJJSP9BFd8=; b=TIw7X9//h/jYKDrb4hIgQMnyiKG4xdMpiO50ShSK5dFWf94dM3qGFaVs1esjdCjibw0fcI Ilt0o0rGuopwOfz6iwAzzvu3dLJXm8xoayhztJ+69n87ymYcUJZMEN9XgUUrxPLSJ2L+/1 SvVJ30vIOaVSMXG6MS5b8EVDxJccth0= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-651-TW7QoxizOZ6Qz_U78fwatA-1; Tue, 04 Jun 2024 03:13:30 -0400 X-MC-Unique: TW7QoxizOZ6Qz_U78fwatA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.10]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A33B1802847; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 07:13:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.42.28.51]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A465492BD2; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 07:13:27 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 08:13:26 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Peter Xu Cc: Steven Sistare , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Fabiano Rosas , David Hildenbrand , Igor Mammedov , Eduardo Habkost , Marcel Apfelbaum , Philippe Mathieu-Daude , Paolo Bonzini , Markus Armbruster Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 17/26] machine: memfd-alloc option Message-ID: References: <1714406135-451286-1-git-send-email-steven.sistare@oracle.com> <1714406135-451286-18-git-send-email-steven.sistare@oracle.com> <79a8023d-2e19-4d80-821d-a03818a5372e@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.12 (2023-09-09) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.10 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 05:48:32PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote: > That property, irrelevant of what it is called (and I doubt whether Dan's > suggestion on "shared-ram" is good, e.g. mmap(MAP_SHARED) doesn't have user > visible fd but it's shared-ram for sure..), is yet another way to specify > guest mem types. > > What if the user specified this property but specified something else in > the -object parameters? E.g. -machine share-ram=on -object > memory-backend-ram,share=off. What should we do? The machine property would only apply to memory regions that are *NOT* being created via -object. The memory-backend objects would always honour their own share settnig. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|