[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPcxDJ5pduUyMA0rf+-aTjK_2eBvig05UTiTptX1nVkWE-_g8w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2022 13:16:34 -0700
From: Jue Wang <juew@...gle.com>
To: pizhenwei@...edance.com
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, jasowang@...hat.com,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, mst@...hat.com,
HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也)
<naoya.horiguchi@....com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, qemu-devel@...gnu.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] recover hardware corrupted page by virtio balloon
Some points to consider:
The injected MCE has _done_ the damages to guest workload. Recovering
the guest poisoned memory doesn't help with the already happened guest
workload memory corruption / loss / interruption due to injected MCEs.
The hypervisor _must_ emulate poisons identified in guest physical
address space (could be transported from the source VM), this is to
prevent silent data corruption in the guest. With a paravirtual
approach like this patch series, the hypervisor can clear some of the
poisoned HVAs knowing for certain that the guest OS has isolated the
poisoned page. I wonder how much value it provides to the guest if the
guest and workload are _not_ in a pressing need for the extra KB/MB
worth of memory.
Thanks,
-Jue
Powered by blists - more mailing lists