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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0CBFC38A2A for ; Fri, 8 May 2020 16:16:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76043206B9 for ; Fri, 8 May 2020 16:16:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b="a2oF2gMs" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728620AbgEHQQa (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2020 12:16:30 -0400 Received: from linux.microsoft.com ([13.77.154.182]:53532 "EHLO linux.microsoft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728568AbgEHQQX (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2020 12:16:23 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.17] (unknown [76.104.235.235]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 44FBD20B717B; Fri, 8 May 2020 09:16:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 44FBD20B717B DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1588954582; bh=zN67uqgpQYPNIbXXPTElpBVedXzm8/J7FKeWL5LhcC0=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=a2oF2gMsa+ICuVc/fFX8c0bRG5sTFQV0lrP2W7qsArF55ZaVGn5XMr/pThueCNHbj uT96kdEZc0eh2ics2DZm0dXWKu6UGV1F9ivnSvk398WUneD5yx+7ke+Ft7d7l59NSm u6bTcahIJckCuKo27xWXNu3LbEvuRzzP3VxXsz5o= Subject: Re: [PATCH v29 00/20] Intel SGX foundations To: "Dr. Greg" Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, dave.hansen@intel.com, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, nhorman@redhat.com, npmccallum@redhat.com, haitao.huang@intel.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de, kai.svahn@intel.com, bp@alien8.de, josh@joshtriplett.org, luto@kernel.org, kai.huang@intel.com, rientjes@google.com, cedric.xing@intel.com, puiterwijk@redhat.com References: <20200421215316.56503-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20200507180654.GA17632@wind.enjellic.com> From: Jordan Hand Message-ID: <97a7a73b-53ea-d4f8-5323-f9f109150480@linux.microsoft.com> Date: Fri, 8 May 2020 09:16:20 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200507180654.GA17632@wind.enjellic.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/7/20 11:06 AM, Dr. Greg wrote: > On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 09:39:55AM -0700, Jordan Hand wrote: > > Good afternoon, I hope the week is going well for everyone. > >> On 4/21/20 2:52 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >>> Make the vDSO callable directly from C by preserving RBX and taking leaf >>> from RCX. > >> Tested with the Open Enclave SDK on top of Intel PSW. Specifically built >> the Intel PSW with changes to support /dev/sgx mapping[1] new in v29. >> >> Tested-by: Jordan Hand >> >> [1] https://github.com/intel/linux-sgx/pull/530 > > Did you re-wire your SDK to convert all your ECALL and exception > handling to the new VDSO architecture? > No. We have many users of our SDK who rely on the out-of-tree driver and will for the foreseeable future. I aim to support both in-tree and out-of-tree with minimal code diff. > > Failures in enclave loading and initialization demonstrate themselves > pretty clearly and are in the domain of the PSW being used. If there > are going to be subtle SGX application operability issues that need to > be found they will be in the new ECALL and exception handling > mechanisms. Fair enough, no I have not tested those mechanisms. Apologies, I should have removed that line from the quoted text. -Jordan