[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190711155645.GD15067@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 08:56:46 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
dave.hansen@...el.com, nhorman@...hat.com, npmccallum@...hat.com,
serge.ayoun@...el.com, shay.katz-zamir@...el.com,
haitao.huang@...el.com, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, kai.svahn@...el.com, bp@...en8.de,
josh@...htriplett.org, luto@...nel.org, kai.huang@...el.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v20 22/28] x86/traps: Attempt to fixup exceptions in vDSO
before signaling
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 06:43:41PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> Is there any obvious reason why #PF fixup is in its own patch and the
> rest are collected to the same patch? I would not find it confusing if
> there was one patch per exception but really don't get this division.
I split them due to SGX's funky #PF behavior with respect to th EPCM.
I'm ok with them being squashed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists