[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZMRXVZYaJ9wojGtS@google.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2023 17:03:33 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>,
Fuad Tabba <tabba@...gle.com>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@...gle.com>,
Maciej Szmigiero <mail@...iej.szmigiero.name>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>,
Wang <wei.w.wang@...el.com>,
Liam Merwick <liam.merwick@...cle.com>,
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...il.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v11 06/29] KVM: Introduce KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION2
On Fri, Jul 28, 2023, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 Jul 2023 at 16:44:49 (-0700), Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> > @@ -95,6 +95,16 @@ struct kvm_userspace_memory_region {
> > __u64 userspace_addr; /* start of the userspace allocated memory */
> > };
> >
> > +/* for KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION2 */
> > +struct kvm_userspace_memory_region2 {
> > + __u32 slot;
> > + __u32 flags;
> > + __u64 guest_phys_addr;
> > + __u64 memory_size;
> > + __u64 userspace_addr;
> > + __u64 pad[16];
>
> Should we replace that pad[16] with:
>
> __u64 size;
>
> where 'size' is the size of the structure as seen by userspace? This is
> used in other UAPIs (see struct sched_attr for example) and is a bit
> more robust for future extensions (e.g. an 'old' kernel can correctly
> reject a newer version of the struct with additional fields it doesn't
> know about if that makes sense, etc).
"flags" serves that purpose, i.e. allows userspace to opt-in to having KVM actually
consume what is currently just padding.
The padding is there mainly to simplify kernel/KVM code, e.g. the number of bytes
that KVM needs to copy in is static.
But now that I think more on this, I don't know why we didn't just unconditionally
bump the size of kvm_userspace_memory_region. We tried to play games with unions
and overlays, but that was a mess[*].
KVM would need to do multiple uaccess reads, but that's not a big deal. Am I
missing something, or did past us just get too clever and miss the obvious solution?
[*] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/Y7xrtf9FCuYRYm1q%40google.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists