secret_freedom: Use fixed size bounce buffer for loading kernel #5203
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
By using a MaybeBounce with N=0 we are allocating a bounce buffer that matches exactly the number of bytes that need to be copied into guest memory, e.g. the size of the kernel file. This is fairly expensive performance wise, and the spike in memory usage from the firecracker process is also unwanted. Thus, just use a 4096 byte fixed size buffer through which we repeatedly read+memcpy. This has slightly better performance (10ms faster for cold boots) and makes Firecracker's memory usage during InstanceStart go back into its O(1) bound.
Changes
...
Reason
...
License Acceptance
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under
the terms of the Apache 2.0 license. For more information on following Developer
Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check
CONTRIBUTING.md
.PR Checklist
tools/devtool checkstyle
to verify that the PR passes theautomated style checks.
how they are solving the problem in a clear and encompassing way.
in the PR.
CHANGELOG.md
.Runbook for Firecracker API changes.
integration tests.
TODO
.rust-vmm
.