On 4/25/2025 8:57 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 07.04.25 09:49, Chenyi Qiang wrote: >> To manage the private and shared RAM states in confidential VMs, >> introduce a new class of PrivateShareManager as a child of >> GenericStateManager, which inherits the six interface callbacks. With a >> different interface type, it can be distinguished from the >> RamDiscardManager object and provide the flexibility for addressing >> specific requirements of confidential VMs in the future. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chenyi Qiang <chenyi.qiang@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- > > See my other mail, likely this is going into the wrong direction. > > If we want to abstract more into a RamStateManager, then it would have > to have two two sets of states, and allow for registering a provider for > each of the states. > > It would then merge these informations. > > But the private vs. shared provider and the plugged vs. unplugged > provider would not be a subclass of the RamStateManager. > > They would have a different interface. > > (e.g., RamDiscardStateProvider vs. RamPrivateStateProvider) Got it! Before the real use case (guest_memfd + virtio-mem) comes, I would keep the original design. Maybe seek the new framework after that work. >
