Dropped non-KVM folks from Cc: so as not to bother them too much. On Tue, Jul 18, 2023, Sean Christopherson wrote: > This is the next iteration of implementing fd-based (instead of vma-based) > memory for KVM guests. If you want the full background of why we are doing > this, please go read the v10 cover letter[1]. > > The biggest change from v10 is to implement the backing storage in KVM > itself, and expose it via a KVM ioctl() instead of a "generic" sycall. > See link[2] for details on why we pivoted to a KVM-specific approach. > > Key word is "biggest". Relative to v10, there are many big changes. > Highlights below (I can't remember everything that got changed at > this point). > > Tagged RFC as there are a lot of empty changelogs, and a lot of missing > documentation. And ideally, we'll have even more tests before merging. > There are also several gaps/opens (to be discussed in tomorrow's PUCK). I've pushed this to https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/tree/guest_memfd along with Isaku's fix for the lock ordering bug on top. As discussed at PUCK, I'll apply fixes/tweaks/changes on top until development stabilizes, and will only squash/fixup when we're ready to post v12 for broad review. Please "formally" post patches just like you normally would do, i.e. don't *just* repond to the buggy mail (though that is also helpful). Standalone patches make it easier for me to manage things via lore/b4. If you can, put gmem or guest_memfd inside the square braces, e.g. [PATCH gmem] KVM: <shortlog> so that it's obvious the patch is intended for the guest_memfd branch. For fixes, please also be sure to use Fixes: tags and split patches to fix exactly one base commit, again to make my life easier. I'll likely add my own annotations when applying, e.g. [FIXUP] and whatnot, but that's purely notes for myself for the future squash/rebase. Thanks!
