Hi Patrick, On Tuesday 11 Feb 2025 at 16:32:31 (+0000), Patrick Roy wrote: > I was hoping that SW_PROTECTED_VM will be the VM type that something > like Firecracker could use, e.g. an interface to guest_memfd specifically > _without_ pKVM, as Fuad was saying. I had, probably incorrectly, assumed that we'd eventually want to allow gmem for all VMs, including traditional KVM VMs that don't have anything special. Perhaps the gmem support could be exposed via a KVM_CAP in this case? Anyway, no objection to the proposed approach in this patch assuming we will eventually have HW_PROTECTED_VM for pKVM VMs, and that _that_ can be bit 31 :). Thanks, Quentin
