Re: [PATCH] x86/sgx: Allows ioctl PROVISION to execute before CREATE

From: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	haitao.huang@intel.com, Kai Huang <kai.huang@intel.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	Jia Zhang <zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/sgx: Allows ioctl PROVISION to execute before CREATE
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2021 14:36:27 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b8e338e7-2436-dbc6-8bc5-bdfc43aed225@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YAiwrDrAsxHVowhV@kernel.org>

On 1/21/21 6:37 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:34:49AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:57:18AM +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 1/20/21 4:05 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
>>>>> In function sgx_encl_create(), the logic of directly assigning
>>>>> value to attributes_mask determines that the call to
>>>>> SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_PROVISION must be after the command of
>>>>> SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_CREATE. If change this assignment statement to
>>>>> or operation, the PROVISION command can be executed earlier and
>>>>> more flexibly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reported-by: Jia Zhang <zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>    arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c | 2 +-
>>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
>>>>> index f45957c05f69..0ca3fc238bc2 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
>>>>> @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ static int sgx_encl_create(struct sgx_encl *encl, struct sgx_secs *secs)
>>>>>    	encl->base = secs->base;
>>>>>    	encl->size = secs->size;
>>>>>    	encl->attributes = secs->attributes;
>>>>> -	encl->attributes_mask = SGX_ATTR_DEBUG | SGX_ATTR_MODE64BIT | SGX_ATTR_KSS;
>>>>> +	encl->attributes_mask |= SGX_ATTR_DEBUG | SGX_ATTR_MODE64BIT | SGX_ATTR_KSS;
>>>>
>>>> Alternatively, move the existing code to sgx_open()?  Initializing the field
>>>> when the encl object is allocated feels more correct.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This seems like a good idea. Thanks for your suggestion. I have sent v2
>>> patch, include the next two patches.
>>
>> Did you ask from Sean about suggested-by's? Now it looks like
>> that doing these patches were originally proposed by Sean.
> 
> Please do not add tags from people *unauthentically*. I do not
> see anything from Sean to any of the patches that would suggest
> adding those tags. You are basically just stamping that to all
> patches, which he has given a code review. Can you stop doing
> this?
> 
> /Jarkko
> 

I am very sorry for the trouble caused to you, I have made improvements 
in the new patch, thanks for your suggestions.

Best regards,
Tianjia