Re: [PATCH 0/5] KVM: guest_memfd: bind backing memory to a NUMA node

[Gregory Price]

On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 01:32:08PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> >> 3. Why not request the guest_memfd to be mmap-able just to be able to
> >>    set a memory policy?
> > 
> > the eventual intent is to enable this for fully confidential,
> > host-unmapped guest, isolated to a particular memory device.
> > 
> > Requiring a mapping to get node-placement is quite defeating the point.
> 
> You only need a VMA, not actually mapped/faulted pages. So I don't immediately
> see the problem?
> 

There is no VMA here - only an inode (GMEM_I), which is where the
shared policy hangs off of.

So yeah, if there was a vma, that's i suppose the missing component
needed to hook up userland mempolicy to all of this - but I would have
thought creating a VMA for guest_memfd is hacky and confusing (since its
intent is to basically not have a VMA).

Is there a series I missed that was proposing this?

~Gregory