RE: [PATCH V4 00/31] x86/sgx and selftests/sgx: Support SGX2

From: "Dhanraj, Vijay" <vijay.dhanraj@intel.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>,
	"Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Cc: "dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
	"Lutomirski, Andy" <luto@kernel.org>,
	"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org" <linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	"shuah@kernel.org" <shuah@kernel.org>,
	"linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Shanahan, Mark" <mark.shanahan@intel.com>, "Christopherson,,
	Sean" <seanjc@google.com>, "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@intel.com>,
	"Zhang, Cathy" <cathy.zhang@intel.com>,
	"Xing, Cedric" <cedric.xing@intel.com>,
	"Huang, Haitao" <haitao.huang@intel.com>,
	"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V4 00/31] x86/sgx and selftests/sgx: Support SGX2
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 20:17:05 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DM8PR11MB5591CACC6757FE71B3E19FC3F6F89@DM8PR11MB5591.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YmJyYwp9UHRLWaTw@kernel.org>

Hi Reinette and Jarkko,

> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 08:29:31PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> > Hi Vijay and Mark,
> >
> > On 4/21/2022 4:46 PM, Dhanraj, Vijay wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I evaluated V4 patch changes with Gramine and ran into an issue when
> trying to set EPC page permission to PROT_NONE. It looks like with V3 patch
> series a change was introduced which requires kernel to have at least R
> permission when calling RESTRICT IOCTL. This change was done under the
> assumption that EPCM requires at least R permission for EMODPE/EACCEPT
> to succeed. But when testing with V2 version, EACCEPT worked fine with
> page permission set to PROT_NONE.
> > >
> > > Thanks to @Shanahan, Mark for confirming that EPCM does not need to
> have R value to allow EACCEPT or EMODPE. Given this, can we please revert
> this change?
> > >
> >
> > Thank you very much for pointing this out. I can revert the change to
> > what was done in V2 where the only check is to ensure that W requires R.
> > This is a requirement of EMODPR. Could you please check if this
> > snippet results in things working for you again?
> >
> > ---8<---
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> > b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c index 83674d054c13..7c7c8a61196e
> > 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> > @@ -855,12 +855,8 @@ static long
> sgx_ioc_enclave_restrict_permissions(struct sgx_encl *encl,
> >  	if (params.permissions & ~SGX_SECINFO_PERMISSION_MASK)
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >
> > -	/*
> > -	 * Read access is required for the enclave to be able to use the page.
> > -	 * SGX instructions like ENCLU[EMODPE] and ENCLU[EACCEPT]
> require
> > -	 * read access.
> > -	 */
> > -	if (!(params.permissions & SGX_SECINFO_R))
> > +	if ((params.permissions & SGX_SECINFO_W) &&
> > +	    !(params.permissions & SGX_SECINFO_R))
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >
> >  	if (params.result || params.count)
> 
> Just adding that it's fine for me to revert this.

Thanks, I verified your patch and now I am able to set EPCM page permission with PROT_NONE.

I also verified the following SGX2 interfaces,
SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_MODIFY_TYPES
SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_REMOVE_PAGES
SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_RESTRICT_PERMISSIONS

And also tested dynamically adding pages to enclave using #PF based approach and this works as expected.

Please feel free to add my Tested-by for the below patches which test the above IOCTLs

[PATCH V4 16/31] x86/sgx: Support adding of pages to an initialized enclave
[PATCH V4 15/31] x86/sgx: Support restricting of enclave page permissions
[PATCH V4 18/31] x86/sgx: Support modifying SGX page type
[PATCH V4 19/31] x86/sgx: Support complete page removal

> 
> BR, Jarkko