Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Stop returning struct page from guest_memfd PFN lookup
Sean Christopherson <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.kvmarm,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.kvm,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Aug 19, 2026, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote: > On 8/18/26 21:55, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2026, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote: > >> On 8/18/26 11:15, Ackerley Tng wrote: > >>> KVM currently expects kvm_gmem_get_pfn() to return a refcounted struct > >>> page. Callers (such as x86 TDP MMU, arm64 Stage-2 fault handler, and SEV-SNP > >>> VMSA / RMP handlers) hold this refcount across page fault handling. > >>> > >>> Holding a page refcount across fault handling is problematic for guest_memfd. > >>> In-place memory conversions between confidential computing shared and private > >>> states inspect folio refcounts to ensure exclusive ownership by guest_memfd. A > >>> concurrent guest page fault taking a reference on the folio causes conversions > >>> to fail due to an elevated refcount. > >> > >> Right. Won't we still, at least temporarily, grab a reference while looking up > >> the folio in the page cache, or will we be preventing that concurrent race with > >> locking? > > > > The latter. What I want to aim for is that if the relevant guest_memfd range > > has never been mmap()'d and there are no memory failures, then conversion is > > guaranteed to not fail due to elevated refcounts. > > > > Or to put it a different way, I want KVM's ABI to be that pausing vCPU is *NOT* > > required to perform an in-place conversion. > > Having the VM access a page that is currently under conversion (triggered by the > VM) should not be the common case, no? Except, prefaulting, of course. "not be the common case" is likely an understatement. In practice, I don't it will happen outside of guest bugs and KVM testcases. It's the testcases that I want to "unblock" though. If we commit to never having to pause vCPUs, even if the guest is misbehaving, then that gives us deterministic behavior we can validate, i.e. a way to detect similar regressions in the future. I don't expect any regressions would be super problematic, but being able to treat any failed conversion as a KVM bug (for the curated setup) mitigates the risk of death by a thousand cuts, i.e. reduces the risk of gradually degrading conversion performance because more and more transient references being taken by KVM.