Re: [PATCH v8 1/8] mm/memfd: Introduce userspace inaccessible memfd

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Oct 21, 2022, Chao Peng wrote:
> > 
> > In the context of userspace inaccessible memfd, what would be a
> > suggested way to enforce NUMA memory policy for physical memory
> > allocation? mbind[1] won't work here in absence of virtual address
> > range.
> 
> How about set_mempolicy():
> https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/set_mempolicy.2.html

Andy Lutomirski brought this up in an off-list discussion way back when the whole
private-fd thing was first being proposed.

  : The current Linux NUMA APIs (mbind, move_pages) work on virtual addresses.  If
  : we want to support them for TDX private memory, we either need TDX private
  : memory to have an HVA or we need file-based equivalents. Arguably we should add
  : fmove_pages and fbind syscalls anyway, since the current API is quite awkward
  : even for tools like numactl.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux