On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 01:38:49PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 11:16:42AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > A while ago I talked with Peter about an extended uffd (here: WP) > > mechanism that would work on fds instead of the process address space. > > As far as I can tell, uffd is a grotesque hack that exists to work around > the poor choice to use anonymous memory instead of file-backed memory > in kvm. Every time I see somebody mention it, I feel pain. How file-backed memory would have helped for the major use-case of uffd which is post-copy migration? -- Sincerely yours, Mike.
