Re: [RFC] proposal: KVM: Orphaned VMs: The Caretaker approach for Live Update

From: Paolo Bonzini

Date: Thu Apr 30 2026 - 23:32:53 EST


On 4/30/26 17:27, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Thu, 2026-04-30 at 15:28 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
I even wonder if, for long term simplicity, the interface for
host->caretaker should be just for the caretaker to swallow the host
into non-root mode, again as in Arm nVHE.

There's a lot of merit in that approach.

I talked about wanting to use this 'caretaker' for secret hiding. But
why have *voluntary* secret hiding with the kernel hiding things from
its own address space, when you have have *mandatory* secret hiding
with something running in EL2, like pKVM.

Well, other than because it's a lot of work? :)

Honestly, I don't see the *caretaker* being much of an ABI at all,
except from one kernel to the next.

I agree.

The *userspace* ABI considerations are all about how you make a vCPU
that runs asynchronously (should it conceptually just be an async
KVM_RUN call, which allows the vCPU to run in a kernel thread up to the
point of kexec? Why is it fundamentally tied to kexec at all?).

It's not tied to kexec. kexec is just forcing a handoff + forcing an update.

The big difference is that:

1) if you don't tie it to kexec, a detached vCPU thread is a struct vhost_task and a blocking vmexit schedules out the thread; while during kexec you have s/kthread/pCPU/ and halting the CPU instead of scheduling it out.

2) if you don't tie it to kexec, address space isolation is the only real reason for the complication of treating the caretaker as a separate bare metal program. OTOH maybe that's a feature - you could do:

- ioctl(KVM_RUN_ASYNC)

- then vmfd/vcpufd handoff to a new mm on top

- then address space isolation on top

- then kexec (de)serialization on top

I'd love to start without kexec in the picture at all. Just show me the
KVM API for starting a *confidential* guest (pKVM, SEV-SNP, whatever),
leaving it running, completely stopping the VMM and then starting a new
VMM to pick up from where it left off.

Why confidential?

Paolo