From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8964EC433EF for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 08:49:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 00A7D6B0071; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 03:49:45 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id EFC596B0075; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 03:49:44 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id DC43C6B0078; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 03:49:44 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0005.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.5]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAB8A6B0071 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 03:49:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin17.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A55A181A47E9 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 08:49:44 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79118989488.17.50DBD77 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by imf15.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB1BA0007 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 08:49:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1644310183; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=67PxmAL3Xd8LpaVSVss2M9MADvWamDZ50hstBrm0qA0=; b=ETM6ubKYloIhD2aMJQmKHH6lj4CYiY+02P1z3A+dt248QYNeFjDjo1qSRStAYZshhyqG1w 2vRdRv7nOgMlwoEOiFESUAY5LRSdrjMCjPT10xdH+y9H9zJZK00WxQMcma6p2X5yCp8401 f30oXzfLsICVx/+1K4s+8Qzl1CIkAl8= Received: from mail-wm1-f70.google.com (mail-wm1-f70.google.com [209.85.128.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-620-fVZFEz87PDGvon49FL_u2w-1; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 03:49:41 -0500 X-MC-Unique: fVZFEz87PDGvon49FL_u2w-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f70.google.com with SMTP id r16-20020a05600c2c5000b0037bb20c50b8so258326wmg.3 for ; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 00:49:41 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent :content-language:to:cc:references:from:organization:subject :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=67PxmAL3Xd8LpaVSVss2M9MADvWamDZ50hstBrm0qA0=; b=RTwS1Y4BXHxsXxZz49bZXYYaoGPOX1PZCghXn8tbbLutwHf0m2PWb14udWTeMPJY8J xWrDZilG3Zg6cxd0BAq5A1HCfsYY4Z5y/gxFvoaKvOOjYAY2jd8rz+oVr3IijeXVODzQ pahCiYneHpmIuWvuf53k5gbYdNHFldFy/F8vGd3qL1dqTQFFtMHkxn9vaaLDeteNsMWF ubneR+dHytCODMj7K4+dNij7N/uMx26+NAEeKMfbqknmeASuIn0T028zR8vP615ZCokp W18MA+TxIcA256/KxNKFfNpnK3yu3RBZFu3e2CKZw+vhcDk9AxjAym71AV40FMrqEHFX TtdQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Vl4Mf+bY/a3N+At/7UjDo+IjOWyTywexkMk6XEsF3gGbktQJ7 YNH6puiTy+qCrd6eu7ATfG4s+8cD3lMQycWxVkTzU8VIEyGRJQU0T/EH7AAV4hWTG4rBCnvqJ7Q 6u125x6+xH8I= X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cd10:: with SMTP id f16mr168366wmj.180.1644310180710; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 00:49:40 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxHPvqe9Mcgm6+Q7EEAETSuMiKnrZQ8yFi6vJk5xylaclj7xAKcrNR6NQiWp2HFxsqZydBSFg== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cd10:: with SMTP id f16mr168333wmj.180.1644310180425; Tue, 08 Feb 2022 00:49:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2003:cb:c712:a800:a1a0:a823:5301:d1af? (p200300cbc712a800a1a0a8235301d1af.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:cb:c712:a800:a1a0:a823:5301:d1af]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b16sm1728277wrj.26.2022.02.08.00.49.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 08 Feb 2022 00:49:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <07aae6e7-4042-1c5c-a482-6ad3a34a3b07@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 09:49:35 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.4.0 To: Vlastimil Babka , Chao Peng , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Jonathan Corbet , Sean Christopherson , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Joerg Roedel , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , x86@kernel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" , Hugh Dickins , Jeff Layton , "J . Bruce Fields" , Andrew Morton , Yu Zhang , "Kirill A . Shutemov" , luto@kernel.org, jun.nakajima@intel.com, dave.hansen@intel.com, ak@linux.intel.com, Mike Rapoport References: <20220118132121.31388-1-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com> <20220118132121.31388-3-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com> <25166513-3074-f3b9-12cc-420ba74f153e@suse.cz> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/12] mm/memfd: Introduce MFD_INACCESSIBLE flag In-Reply-To: <25166513-3074-f3b9-12cc-420ba74f153e@suse.cz> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: DBB1BA0007 X-Stat-Signature: ru8brswynxqffamf8sg7i5s4dppxm9hs Authentication-Results: imf15.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=ETM6ubKY; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=none (imf15.hostedemail.com: domain of david@redhat.com has no SPF policy when checking 170.10.133.124) smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com X-Rspamd-Server: rspam06 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1644310183-857530 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 07.02.22 19:51, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 1/18/22 14:21, Chao Peng wrote: >> Introduce a new memfd_create() flag indicating the content of the >> created memfd is inaccessible from userspace. It does this by force >> setting F_SEAL_INACCESSIBLE seal when the file is created. It also set >> F_SEAL_SEAL to prevent future sealing, which means, it can not coexist >> with MFD_ALLOW_SEALING. >> >> The pages backed by such memfd will be used as guest private memory in >> confidential computing environments such as Intel TDX/AMD SEV. Since >> page migration/swapping is not yet supported for such usages so these >> pages are currently marked as UNMOVABLE and UNEVICTABLE which makes >> them behave like long-term pinned pages. > > Shouldn't the amount of such memory allocations be restricted? E.g. similar > to secretmem_mmap() doing mlock_future_check(). I've raised this already in the past and Kirill wanted to look into it [1]. We'll most certainly need a way to limit/control the amount of unswappable + unmovable ("worse than mlock" memory) a user/process can consume via this mechanism. [1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20211122135933.arjxpl7wyskkwvwv@box.shutemov.name -- Thanks, David / dhildenb