Message-ID: <5540DB6E.4070108@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 15:23:58 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>, Bandan Das <bsd@redhat.com>
CC: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Wincy Van <fanwenyi0529@gmail.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: nVMX: Don't return error on nested bitmap memory
 allocation failure
References: <jpgmw1srps3.fsf@redhat.com> <554083D4.8090906@siemens.com> <jpgpp6nnlez.fsf@redhat.com> <5540D735.5030103@siemens.com>
In-Reply-To: <5540D735.5030103@siemens.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1035
Lines: 25


On 29/04/2015 15:05, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > Yeah... I hear you. Ok, let me put it this way - Assume that we can
> > defer this allocation up until the point that the nested subsystem is
> > actually used i.e L1 tries running a guest and we try to allocate this
> > area. If get_free_page() failed in that case, would we still want to
> > kill L1 too ? I guess no.
>
> We could block the hypervisor thread on the allocation, just like it
> would block on faults for swapped out pages or new ones that have to be
> reclaimed from the page cache first.

In that case we should avoid making the allocation GFP_ATOMIC to begin with.

If a GFP_KERNEL allocation failed, returning -ENOMEM from KVM_RUN (which
practically means killing the guest) would actually be a very real
possibility.

Paolo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/