Re: [PATCH v10 40/41] KVM: selftests: Update private_mem_conversions_test to mmap() guest_memfd

Ackerley Tng <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.kvm,dev.linux.lists.linux-coco,org.kernel.vger.linux-doc,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kselftest,org.kernel.vger.linux-trace-kernel,org.kvack.linux-mm
Message-ID <CAEvNRgF8XE2Xsn-g3qzPxcdfLdvJEc1FZw9LQ+deeXsFpdZsOg@mail.gmail.com>
Sean Christopherson <[email protected]> writes:

> On Fri, Aug 21, 2026, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
>> On 8/8/2026 5:53 AM, Ackerley Tng via B4 Relay wrote:
>> > From: Ackerley Tng<[email protected]>
>> >
>> > Update the private memory conversions selftest to also test conversions
>> > that are done "in-place" via per-guest_memfd memory attributes. In-place
>> > conversions require the host to be able to mmap() the guest_memfd so that
>> > the host and guest can share the same backing physical memory.
>> >
>> > This includes several updates, that are conditioned on the system
>> > supporting per-guest_memfd attributes (kvm_has_gmem_attributes):
>> >
>> > 1. Set up guest_memfd requesting MMAP and INIT_SHARED.
>>
>> If I understand correctly, even with in-place gmem, the model that shared
>> memory comes from the userspace_addr and private memory comes from gmem can
>> still work without passing GUEST_MEMFD_FLAG_MMAP flag.
>>
>> Since this model is not prohibited by KVM. I think we should keep the
>> testcase for this model to ensure test coverage?
>
> +1.  Deprecated doesn't mean unsupported.

The original test case was for non-in-place conversion, which wasn't
removed, it still passes.

Is the ask to also test, under kvm_has_gmem_attributes aka
gmem_in_place_conversion, to have guest_memfd used as purely for private
memory and have shared memory taken from somewhere else completely?

I can rephrase the changelog and change the code to clarify that this
patch is meant to specifically test in-place conversion with MMAP, the
intended usage of in-place conversions.

The ask to test gmem for private and something else for shared seems
like a different test that can be added separately, perhaps in a
follow-up series?
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.