[PATCH V9 1/7] KVM: guest_memfd: Use guest mem inodes instead of anonymous inodes
Garg, Shivank
shivankg at amd.com
Mon Aug 11 08:02:22 UTC 2025
On 8/8/2025 3:04 AM, Ackerley Tng wrote:
> David Hildenbrand <david at redhat.com> writes:
>
>> On 13.07.25 19:43, Shivank Garg wrote:
>>> From: Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng at google.com>
>>>
>>> + ctx->ops = &kvm_gmem_super_operations;
>>
>> Curious, why is that required? (secretmem doesn't have it, so I wonder)
>>
>
> Good point! pseudo_fs_fill_super() fills in a struct super_operations
> which already does simple_statfs, so guest_memfd doesn't need this.
>
Right, simple_statfs isn't strictly needed in this patch, but the
super_operations is required for the subsequent patches in
the series which add custom alloc_inode, destroy_inode, and free_inode
callback.
>>> + if (!try_module_get(kvm_gmem_fops.owner))
>>> + goto err;
>>
>> Curious, shouldn't there be a module_put() somewhere after this function
>> returned a file?
>>
>
> This was interesting indeed, but IIUC this is correct.
>
> I think this flow was basically copied from __anon_inode_getfile(),
> which does this try_module_get().
>
> The corresponding module_put() is in __fput(), which calls fops_put()
> and calls module_put() on the owner.
>
>>> +
>>>
>>
>> Nothing else jumped at me.
>>
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
> Since we're going to submit this patch through Shivank's mempolicy
> support series, I'll follow up soon by sending a replacement patch in
> reply to this series so Shivank could build on top of that?
>
yes, I'll post the V10 soon.
Thanks,
Shivank
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list