Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:3;
Date:   Thu, 2 Nov 2023 09:03:42 -0700
In-Reply-To: <6642c379-1023-4716-904f-4bbf076744c2@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
References: <20231027182217.3615211-1-seanjc@google.com> <20231027182217.3615211-17-seanjc@google.com>
 <ZUFGRyQEuWj4RJS0@google.com> <ZUFzZf-YmCRYP6qo@google.com>
 <CALzav=d9eXZfK=op7A=UftbpuPpUbxqV6CmkqqxxBNuNsUU4nw@mail.gmail.com> <6642c379-1023-4716-904f-4bbf076744c2@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <ZUPIXt1XzZrriswG@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 16/35] KVM: Add KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD ioctl() for
 guest-specific backing memory
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc:     David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
        Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
        "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
        linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
        kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>,
        Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@intel.com>,
        Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>,
        Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>,
        Anish Moorthy <amoorthy@google.com>,
        Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com>,
        Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@intel.com>,
        "=?utf-8?Q?Micka=C3=ABl_Sala=C3=BCn?=" <mic@digikod.net>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@google.com>,
        Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@google.com>,
        Maciej Szmigiero <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
        Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.com>,
        Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com>,
        Liam Merwick <liam.merwick@oracle.com>,
        Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 02, 2023, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 10/31/23 23:39, David Matlack wrote:
> > > > Maybe can you sketch out how you see this proposal being extensible to
> > > > using guest_memfd for shared mappings?
> > > For in-place conversions, e.g. pKVM, no additional guest_memfd is needed.  What's
> > > missing there is the ability to (safely) mmap() guest_memfd, e.g. KVM needs to
> > > ensure there are no outstanding references when converting back to private.
> > > 
> > > For TDX/SNP, assuming we don't find a performant and robust way to do in-place
> > > conversions, a second fd+offset pair would be needed.
> > Is there a way to support non-in-place conversions within a single guest_memfd?
> 
> For TDX/SNP, you could have a hook from KVM_SET_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES to guest
> memory.  The hook would invalidate now-private parts if they have a VMA,
> causing a SIGSEGV/EFAULT if the host touches them.
> 
> It would forbid mappings from multiple gfns to a single offset of the
> guest_memfd, because then the shared vs. private attribute would be tied to
> the offset.  This should not be a problem; for example, in the case of SNP,
> the RMP already requires a single mapping from host physical address to
> guest physical address.

I don't see how this can work.  It's not a M:1 scenario (where M is multiple gfns),
it's a 1:N scenario (wheren N is multiple offsets).  The *gfn* doesn't change on
a conversion, what needs to change to do non-in-place conversion is the pfn, which
is effectively the guest_memfd+offset pair.

So yes, we *could* support non-in-place conversions within a single guest_memfd,
but it would require a second offset, at which point it makes sense to add a
second file descriptor as well.  Userspace could still use a single guest_memfd
instance, i.e. pass in the same file descriptor but different offsets.