[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200818151524.GE132200@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 18:15:24 +0300
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: Nathaniel McCallum <npmccallum@...hat.com>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Jethro Beekman <jethro@...tanix.com>,
Cedric Xing <cedric.xing@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
asapek@...gle.com, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
chenalexchen@...gle.com, Conrad Parker <conradparker@...gle.com>,
cyhanish@...gle.com, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Huang, Haitao" <haitao.huang@...el.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
"Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>,
"Svahn, Kai" <kai.svahn@...el.com>, Keith Moyer <kmoy@...gle.com>,
Christian Ludloff <ludloff@...gle.com>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com>,
Patrick Uiterwijk <puiterwijk@...hat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, yaozhangx@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v36 21/24] x86/vdso: Implement a vDSO for Intel SGX
enclave call
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 04:08:46PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 7:55 AM Nathaniel McCallum <npmccallum@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > In a past revision of this patch, I had requested a void *misc
> > parameter that could be passed through vdso_sgx_enter_enclave_t into
> > sgx_enclave_exit_handler_t. This request encountered some push back
> > and I dropped the issue. However, I'd like to revisit it or something
> > similar.
>
> Why do you need an exit handler at all? IIRC way back when I
> suggested that we simply not support it at all. If you want to
> call__vdso_sgx_enter_enclave() in a loop, call it in a loop. If you
> want to wrap it intelligently in Rust, you don't want a callback
> anyway -- that forces you have an FFI (or non-Rust, anyway) frame on
> the stack, which interacts poorly with panic handling and prevents you
> from using await in your Rust callback handler. If, on the other
> hand, you just call __vdso_sg_enter_enclave() in a loop, all these
> problems go away and, if you really want, you can pass in a callback
> in Rust and call the callback from Rust.
How would Intel SDK be able to do its stack manipulation?
> What am I missing? I still don't really understand why we are
> supporting this mechanism at all. Just the asm code to invoke the
> callback seems to be about half of the entire function.
I'm most worried maintaining all of this given all the innovative ways
that users can exploit an uapi.
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists