linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE] PUCK Agenda - 2023.06.28

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZJ3zU52uK0N+uoDn@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Jun 2023 14:10:43 -0700
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] PUCK Agenda - 2023.06.28 - CANCELED

+maintainers and other interested parties

On Tue, Jun 27, 2023, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> No topic this week, and I need to reclaim some time this week as I will be OOO
> all of next week.
> 
> For future topics, a few things on my radar that I am hoping to discuss in the
> not-too-distant future, but that need additional work before they're worth
> discussing:
> 
>  - Coordinating guest_mem() development.  I need to post patches, plan is to do
>    that the week after I get back.
> 
>  - Overhauling KVM's gfn_to_pfn() APIs.  Need a status update from David S., e.g.
>    I don't even know if this being actively worked.
> 
>    https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZGvUsf7lMkrNDHuE@google.com
> 
>  - KVM + UFFD scalability.  We're not yet at the point where we need a synchronous
>    discussion, but I suspect we'll want a live discussion before merging.
> 
>    https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230602161921.208564-1-amoorthy@google.com
> 
>  - Hiding KVM internals from the kernel at large, e.g. moving kvm_host.h into
>    arch/<arch>/kvm and virt/kvm/, and exporting "internal" KVM symbols if and
>    only if there are vendor modules.  Needs an RFC from us (Google GCE people).

Actually, one semi-urgent topic that I'd like to discuss is the LPC KVM Microconference.
Specifically, how we want to utilize the allotted three hours.  E.g. we can squeeze
in ~9 topics if we do 20 minutes per topic, but 20 minutes feels too short for some
of the "big" topics like guest_mem(), fine-grained permissions, KVM vs. perf, and pKVM.
But I don't want to focus on just 3-4 topics and not leave time to sync on other
things.  IMO, a mix would work well, e.g. use 2 hours for 3-4 big topics, and then
1 hour for 4-6 small topics.

I'm thinking we could use a PUCK session in mid July to get input on what folks
generally want the KVM MC to look like so that we can broadcast rough details.
And then maybe another session in the September timeframe (after submissions have
closed) to go over the "official" schedule before it becomes officially official.

Thoughts?