From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1B47C433EF for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2022 20:20:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231178AbiBIUUI (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Feb 2022 15:20:08 -0500 Received: from gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com ([23.128.96.19]:41844 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231176AbiBIUUH (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Feb 2022 15:20:07 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x331.google.com (mail-wm1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::331]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E8C6E040DC8; Wed, 9 Feb 2022 12:19:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x331.google.com with SMTP id d14-20020a05600c34ce00b0037bf4d14dc7so1829794wmq.3; Wed, 09 Feb 2022 12:19:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=sender:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=CqsKKaBJAfyykjVru6LPSv6oTLCyk2AFIDEOcj0IiF4=; b=NelNrri3yMogvk8gqSHXFa4cVb5szYFxMDKoVZN2TwaJf6iFBXO/zj6b5IRdnMR0oa gtJtfzDARIKdTdzSAmKQNTsVlFsXlgaSayYfuFQ/0pIr2CHWpdOTzdS2t63yCW5mTN+F Oq6lUfLouPhxy7Eqy7zhhFMeop0BtTdKMRsfoA5ea5zjreAZ5veH/BvrY2xctjQeZ3YK ROil9vg7lA/7ojCiZ3wB8qgzcPOf+kw6Qa04ORkVwCf3S64uF9yCpThWqQkT5MbJGiwj V2dBxgTZxfpu+Fjt1ZeLbYR7wHvQR4NECvs77qdl6bJW36Wm3BtQEhOhtUafXWXGk/vH vfaw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent :subject:content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=CqsKKaBJAfyykjVru6LPSv6oTLCyk2AFIDEOcj0IiF4=; b=kC8cstvDkx5XxbykUrDO9gyeuFdkYQIfEYKJ0c4A0X9mJszyhyrFiEeEHJo/ms0o4j xhNZEY22SZQ6y6XYMyhldI/m/or56GAZqvxe8ektFRdPTg02j7wegVmkkJFWS/StkBDq A+FaMv/hF4Ii4CeHxPfaTLT0P4tHPiV3vNJyMWEzMeKT421VL1aetOKk0Zwu0JZEZvAz lWfNHr942Ij7LA2Hm7TsWr/t9o7DZ50s7sTPRzzFnfD6IHyu3si6ih6DlDPgGS1laAyI RisiIpcaU8LY6ohY/W+MVODvdFXptUHQde4bTi4BCamMsfdBWpX7NpGY80mj65TgkTJ0 czyg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Xiz5ZxozU/rQSyqb+y2HA0Sb8YapKBoCAmTE8hvSckGJ+1dDy b7+oXPm1BKy4WAiXpdtyFn36XV7TOfU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx0ge3CY/5UnNcF3/zeuPDxr0gKdbfDvc2PjmvToGDsvGCaiAoziAx2kp1oixA1AAGVbLwo6w== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1d8b:: with SMTP id p11mr4135039wms.115.1644437996681; Wed, 09 Feb 2022 12:19:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.160] ([170.253.36.171]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r12sm16910256wrw.73.2022.02.09.12.19.55 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 09 Feb 2022 12:19:55 -0800 (PST) Sender: Alejandro Colomar Message-ID: <0bdb594e-7c3d-e05a-0d40-eff92b4cd252@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2022 21:19:54 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH v11] sgx.7: New page with overview of Software Guard eXtensions (SGX) Content-Language: en-US To: Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: linux-man@vger.kernel.org, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen , nathaniel@profian.com, Michael Kerrisk , Reinette Chatre References: <20211211153320.17438-1-jarkko@kernel.org> From: "Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)" In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org Hi Jarkko, On 1/28/22 02:19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 02:50:56AM +0100, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote: >> Hi Jarkko, >> >> Please see some comments below. >> >> Thanks, >> Alex > > Thank you. I've addressed all the comments below. However, I feel that > /dev/sgx_provision is not properly documented at all. I also think that > Reinette's argument for v10 was fair that "remove VEPC" ioctl that QEMU > uses should not be left out from the initial patch set. > > I'm implementing user space that doest attestation, so I rather write a > proper description of the attestation, once it is working, rather than add > to the number of review rounds. Fair enough. Please send an v12 with those comments addressed, and I'll merge it! (if you miss anything, we'll fix it later, don't worry) Thanks, Alex