[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e70c9e92-0bd4-59a4-21b1-bccf8621c6bb@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:54:19 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: "Dr. Greg" <greg@...ellic.com>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Jethro Beekman <jethro@...tanix.com>,
Darren Kenny <darren.kenny@...cle.com>,
andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, asapek@...gle.com, bp@...en8.de,
cedric.xing@...el.com, chenalexchen@...gle.com,
conradparker@...gle.com, cyhanish@...gle.com,
haitao.huang@...el.com, kai.huang@...el.com, kai.svahn@...el.com,
kmoy@...gle.com, ludloff@...gle.com, luto@...nel.org,
nhorman@...hat.com, npmccallum@...hat.com, puiterwijk@...hat.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, tglx@...utronix.de, yaozhangx@...gle.com,
mikko.ylinen@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v40 10/24] mm: Add 'mprotect' hook to struct
vm_operations_struct
On 11/6/20 9:43 AM, Dr. Greg wrote:
> In light of this, given the decision by the driver authors to not
> fully equip the driver with EDMM support, the mprotect protection
> requirements are straight forward and minimalistic. All that is
> needed is a binary valued variable, set on the command-line, that
> either allows or denies anonymous code execution by an enclave,
> ie. access to page protection changes after initialization.
To that, I say NAK. We need more flexibility than a boot-time-fixed,
system-wide switch.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists