On 18.04.19 14:01, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 13:24:43 +0200 > David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> On 18.04.19 11:38, Igor Mammedov wrote: >>> On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 13:09:08 +0200 >>> Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> wrote: >>> >>>> This fails with more than 8TB, e.g. "-m 9T " >>>> >>>> [pid 231065] ioctl(10, KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION, {slot=0, flags=0, >>>> guest_phys_addr=0, memory_size=0, userspace_addr=0x3ffc8500000}) = 0 >>>> [pid 231065] ioctl(10, KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION, {slot=0, flags=0, >>>> guest_phys_addr=0, memory_size=9895604649984, >>>> userspace_addr=0x3ffc8500000}) = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument) >>>> >>>> seems that the 2nd memslot gets the full size (and not 9TB-size of first >>>> slot). >>> >>> it turns out MemoryRegions is rendered correctly in to 2 parts (one per >>> alias), >>> but follow up flatview_simplify() collapses adjacent ranges back >>> into big one. >> >> That sounds dangerous. Imagine doing that at runtime (e.g. hotplugging a >> DIMM), the kvm memory slot would temporarily be deleted to insert the >> new, bigger one. Guest would crash. This could happen if backing memory >> of two DIMMs would by pure luck be allocated side by side in user space. >> > > not sure I fully get your concerns, but if you look at can_merge() > it ensures that ranges belong to the same MemoryRegion. > > It's hard for me to say if flatview_simplify() works as designed, > MemoryRegion code is quite complicated so I'd deffer to Paolo's > opinion. >
What I had in mind: We have the Memory Region for memory devices (m->device_memory). Assume The first DIMM is created, allocating memory in the user space process: [0x100000000 .. 0x20000000]. It is placed at offset 0 in m->device_memory. Guests starts to run, a second DIMM is hotplugged. Memory in user space process is allocated (by pure luck) at: [0x200000000 .. 0x30000000]. It is placed at offset 0x100000000 in m->device_memory. Without looking at the code, I could imagine that both might be merged into a single memory slot. That is my concern. Maybe it is not valid. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb