[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YC1AkNPNET+T928c@google.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 08:13:04 -0800
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: "Kalra, Ashish" <Ashish.Kalra@....com>
Cc: "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"rkrcmar@...hat.com" <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
"joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>, "bp@...e.de" <bp@...e.de>,
"Lendacky, Thomas" <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"srutherford@...gle.com" <srutherford@...gle.com>,
"venu.busireddy@...cle.com" <venu.busireddy@...cle.com>,
"Singh, Brijesh" <brijesh.singh@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 10/16] KVM: x86: Introduce KVM_GET_SHARED_PAGES_LIST
ioctl
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021, Kalra, Ashish wrote:
> From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2021, Ashish Kalra wrote:
> > From: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
> >
> > The ioctl is used to retrieve a guest's shared pages list.
>
> >What's the performance hit to boot time if KVM_HC_PAGE_ENC_STATUS is passed
> >through to userspace? That way, userspace could manage the set of pages >in
> >whatever data structure they want, and these get/set ioctls go away.
>
> What is the advantage of passing KVM_HC_PAGE_ENC_STATUS through to user-space
> ?
>
> As such it is just a simple interface to get the shared page list via the
> get/set ioctl's. simply an array is passed to these ioctl to get/set the
> shared pages list.
It eliminates any probability of the kernel choosing the wrong data structure,
and it's two fewer ioctls to maintain and test.
> >Also, aren't there plans for an in-guest migration helper? If so, do we
> >have any idea what that interface will look like? E.g. if we're going to
> >end up with a full >fledged driver in the guest, why not bite the bullet now
> >and bypass KVM entirely?
>
> Even the in-guest migration helper will be using page encryption status
> hypercalls, so some interface is surely required.
If it's a driver with a more extensive interace, then the hypercalls can be
replaced by a driver operation. That's obviously a big if, though.
> Also the in-guest migration will be mainly an OVMF component, won't really
> be a full fledged kernel driver in the guest.
Is there code and/or a description of what the proposed helper would look like?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists