Re: [PATCH v3 29/30] luo: allow preserving memfd

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:59:40PM +0000, Pasha Tatashin wrote:

> vmalloc is always fully populated, but if we add support for
> preserving an area with holes, it can also be used for preserving
> vmalloc. 

Why? If you can't create it with vmap what is the point?

> By the way, I don't like calling it *vmalloc* preservation
> because we aren't preserving the original virtual addresses; we are
> preserving a list of pages that are reassembled into a virtually
> contiguous area. Maybe kho map, or kho page map, not sure, but vmalloc
> does not sound right to me.

No preservation retains the virtual address, that is pretty much
universal.

It is vmalloc preservation because the flow is

 x = vmalloc()
 kho_preserve_vmalloc(x, &preserved)
 [..]
 x = kho_restore_vmalloc(preserved)
 vfree(x)

It is the same naming as folio preservation. Upon restore you get a
vmalloc() back.

> > And again in real systems we expect memfd to be fully populated too.
> 
> I thought so too, but we already have a use case for slightly sparse
> memfd, unfortunately, that becomes *very* inefficient when fully
> populated.

Really? Why not use multiple memfds :(

So maybe you need to do optimized sparseness in memfd :(

Jason