[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180828083540.GH15508@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 11:35:40 +0300
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
sean.j.christopherson@...el.com, nhorman@...hat.com,
npmccallum@...hat.com, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Serge Ayoun <serge.ayoun@...el.com>,
"open list:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 09/13] x86/sgx: Enclave Page Cache (EPC) memory
manager
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 02:15:34PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 08/27/2018 11:53 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > +struct sgx_epc_page_ops {
> > + bool (*get)(struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page);
> > + void (*put)(struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page);
> > + bool (*reclaim)(struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page);
> > + void (*block)(struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page);
> > + void (*write)(struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page);
> > +};
>
> Why do we need a fancy, slow (retpoline'd) set of function pointers when
> we only have one user of these (the SGX driver)?
KVM has its own implementation for these operations.
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists