[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200318221824.GA55522@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 00:18:24 +0200
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Xing, Cedric" <cedric.xing@...el.com>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Jethro Beekman <jethro@...tanix.com>,
Nathaniel McCallum <npmccallum@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
dave.hansen@...el.com, Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com>,
"Huang, Haitao" <haitao.huang@...el.com>,
andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
"Svahn, Kai" <kai.svahn@...el.com>, bp@...en8.de,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>, luto@...nel.org,
kai.huang@...el.com, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Patrick Uiterwijk <puiterwijk@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Connor Kuehl <ckuehl@...hat.com>,
Harald Hoyer <harald@...hat.com>,
Lily Sturmann <lsturman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v28 21/22] x86/vdso: Implement a vDSO for Intel SGX
enclave call
On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 12:01:26AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 04:56:42PM -0700, Xing, Cedric wrote:
> > On 3/16/2020 3:55 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 02:31:36PM +0100, Jethro Beekman wrote:
> > > > Can someone remind me why we're not passing TCS in RBX but on the stack?
> > >
> > > I finally remembered why. It's pulled off the stack and passed into the
> > > exit handler. I'm pretty sure the vDSO could take it in %rbx and manually
> > > save it on the stack, but I'd rather keep the current behavior so that the
> > > vDSO is callable from C (assuming @leaf is changed to be passed via %rcx).
> > >
> > The idea is that the caller of this vDSO API is C callable, hence it cannot
> > receive TCS in %rbx anyway. Then it has to either MOV to %rbx or PUSH to
> > stack. Either way the complexity is the same. The vDSO API however has to
> > always save it on stack for exit handler. So receiving it via stack ends up
> > in simplest code.
>
> It is never C callable anyway given that not following the ABI so
> who cares about being C callable anyway?
A direct quote from the documentation:
"**Important!** __vdso_sgx_enter_enclave() is **NOT** compliant with
the x86-64 ABI, i.e. cannot be called from standard C code."
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists