Re: [PATCH v9 04/15] x86/sgx: Implement basic EPC misc cgroup functionality

["Haitao Huang" <haitao.huang@linux.intel.com>]

On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 15:35:38 -0600, Haitao Huang  
<haitao.huang@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 12:25:58 -0600, Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 01:06:27PM -0800, Haitao Huang  
>> <haitao.huang@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>> +static int sgx_epc_cgroup_alloc(struct misc_cg *cg);
>>> +
>>> +const struct misc_res_ops sgx_epc_cgroup_ops = {
>>> +	.alloc = sgx_epc_cgroup_alloc,
>>> +	.free = sgx_epc_cgroup_free,
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +static void sgx_epc_misc_init(struct misc_cg *cg, struct  
>>> sgx_epc_cgroup *epc_cg)
>>> +{
>>> +	cg->res[MISC_CG_RES_SGX_EPC].priv = epc_cg;
>>> +	epc_cg->cg = cg;
>>> +}
>>
>> This is a possibly a nit pick but I share it here for consideration.
>>
>> Would it be more prudent to have the signature like
>>   alloc(struct misc_res *res, struct misc_cg *cg)
>> so that implementations are free of the assumption of how cg and res are
>> stored?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Michal
>
> Will do.
>
> Thanks
> Haitao
>
Actually, because the root node is initialized in sgx_cgroup_init(), which  
only has access to misc_cg_root() so we can't pass a misc_res struct  
without knowing cg->res relationship. We could hide it with a getter, but  
I think it's a little overkill at the moment. I can sign up for adding  
this improvement if we feel it needed in future.

Thanks
Haitao