linux-kernel - [LSF/MM TOPIC] VM containers

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <56A2511F.1080900@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 22 Jan 2016 10:56:15 -0500
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	lsf-pc@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Cc:	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Linux kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [LSF/MM TOPIC] VM containers

Hi,

I am trying to gauge interest in discussing VM containers at the LSF/MM
summit this year. Projects like ClearLinux, Qubes, and others are all
trying to use virtual machines as better isolated containers.

That changes some of the goals the memory management subsystem has,
from "use all the resources effectively" to "use as few resources as
necessary, in case the host needs the memory for something else".

These VMs could be as small as running just one application, so this
goes a little further than simply trying to squeeze more virtual
machines into a system with frontswap and cleancache.

Single-application VM sandboxes could also get their data differently,
using (partial) host filesystem passthrough, instead of a virtual
block device. This may change the relative utility of caching data
inside the guest page cache, versus freeing up that memory and
allowing the host to use it to cache things.

Are people interested in discussing this at LSF/MM, or is it better
saved for a different forum?

-- 
All rights reversed