[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210113182230.GX2743@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 10:22:30 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Haitao Huang <haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Jethro Beekman <jethro@...tanix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86/sgx: Synchronize encl->srcu in sgx_encl_release().
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 07:00:33PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 09:46:02AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> < Lemme trim that mail fat >
>
> > It seems to me that loading and unloading SGX enclaves qualifies as a
> > configuration operation, so use of synchronize_srcu_expedited() should be
> > just fine in that case. This of course implies that SGX enclaves should
> > not be loaded or unloaded while an aggressive real-time application
> > is running. Which might well be the case for other reasons.
>
> I believe RT and SGX should be orthogonal to each-other unless someone rolls out
> of the woodwork, wanting to run realtime enclaves... Ewww.
I could speculate about an RT workload running on a system that also
ran non-realtime SGX workloads, but who knows? Stranger things have
happened. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists