On 4/17/2021 1:30 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
[...]
index fadaccb95a4c..cd2374802702 100644
--- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
+++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
@@ -436,6 +436,8 @@ static inline int kvm_arch_vcpu_memslots_id(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
}
#endif
+#define KVM_NR_SHARED_RANGES 32
+
/*
* Note:
* memslots are not sorted by id anymore, please use id_to_memslot()
@@ -513,6 +515,10 @@ struct kvm {
pid_t userspace_pid;
unsigned int max_halt_poll_ns;
u32 dirty_ring_size;
+ bool mem_protected;
+ void *id;
+ int nr_shared_ranges;
+ struct range shared_ranges[KVM_NR_SHARED_RANGES];
Hard no for me. IMO, anything that requires KVM to track shared/pinned pages in
a separate tree/array is non-starter. More specific to TDX #MCs, KVM should not
be the canonical reference for the state of a page.
Do you mean something in struct page to track if the page is shared or
private?
