[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 23:57:08 +0200
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jia Zhang <zhang.jia@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] x86/sgx: Allows ioctl PROVISION to execute before
CREATE
On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 09:26:52PM +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
> In the function sgx_create_enclave(), the direct assignment
> operation of attributes_mask determines that the ioctl PROVISION
> operation must be executed after the ioctl CREATE operation,
> which will limit the flexibility of sgx developers.
Please write acronyms correctly. It's not 'sgx'. It's 'SGX'.
Who are the "sgx developers" and how do they benefit from this?
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists