lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 09:04:44 -0700 From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com> Cc: "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>, Platform Driver <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>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 04/13] x86/sgx: Architectural structures On 09/03/2018 06:16 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> + EBLOCK = 0x9, >> + EPA = 0xA, >> + EWB = 0xB, >> + ETRACK = 0xC, >> + EAUG = 0xD, >> + EMODPR = 0xE, >> + EMODT = 0xF, >> +}; > Hmm... This E prefix confuses me with (system wide) error codes. Has > it been discussed before? If so, can you point on the conclusion why > the current format is good? Making them SGX_EWHATEVER isn't a horrible idea.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists