linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 13/13] KVM: Enable memfd based page invalidation/fallocate

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

Message-ID: <20211123150028.GE32088@chaop.bj.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 23 Nov 2021 23:00:28 +0800
From:   Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>, jun.nakajima@...el.com,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, david@...hat.com, qemu-devel@...gnu.org,
        "J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>, dave.hansen@...el.com,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, ak@...ux.intel.com,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        luto@...nel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, susie.li@...el.com,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        john.ji@...el.com, Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 13/13] KVM: Enable memfd based page
 invalidation/fallocate

On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 10:09:28AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 11/23/21 02:06, Chao Peng wrote:
> > > Maybe the kvm has to be tagged with a sequential id that incremented every
> > > allocation. This id can be checked here.
> > Sounds like a sequential id will be needed, no existing fields in struct
> > kvm can work for this.
> 
> There's no need to new concepts when there's a perfectly usable reference
> count. :)

Indeed, thanks.

> 
> Paolo