[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ffcef189-78fd-1b57-88bb-577708fb7abc@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 12:34:00 -0600
From: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
Jethro Beekman <jethro@...tanix.com>
Cc: linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Saravanan D <saravanand@...com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Krish Sadhukhan <krish.sadhukhan@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/sgx: Add SGX_MemTotal to /proc/meminfo
On 8/18/21 7:40 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 03:29:59PM +0200, Jethro Beekman wrote:
>> On 2021-08-18 15:25, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>>> The amount of SGX memory on the system is determined by the BIOS and it
>>> varies wildly between systems. It can be from dozens of MB's on desktops
>>> or VM's, up to many GB's on servers. Just like for regular memory, it is
>>> sometimes useful to know the amount of usable SGX memory in the system.
>>>
>>> Add SGX_MemTotal field to /proc/meminfo, which shows the total amount of
>>> usable SGX memory in the system. E.g. with 32 MB reserved for SGX from
>>> BIOS, the printout would be:
>>>
>>> SGX_MemTotal: 22528 kB
>>>
>>> It is less than 32 MB because some of the space is reserved for Enclave
>>> Page Cache Metadata (EPCM), which contains state variables for all the
>>> pages in the Enclave Page Cache (EPC). The latter contains the pages,
>>> which applications can use to create enclaves.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
>>> ---
>>> Documentation/x86/sgx.rst | 6 ++++++
>>> arch/x86/include/asm/sgx.h | 10 +++++++---
>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c | 7 ++++++-
>>> arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c | 5 +++++
>>> 4 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/x86/sgx.rst b/Documentation/x86/sgx.rst
>>> index dd0ac96ff9ef..68ee171e1d8f 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/x86/sgx.rst
>>> +++ b/Documentation/x86/sgx.rst
>>> @@ -250,3 +250,9 @@ user wants to deploy SGX applications both on the host and in guests
>>> on the same machine, the user should reserve enough EPC (by taking out
>>> total virtual EPC size of all SGX VMs from the physical EPC size) for
>>> host SGX applications so they can run with acceptable performance.
>>> +
>>> +Supplemental fields for /proc/meminfo
>>> +=====================================
>>> +
>>> +SGX_MemTotal
>>> + The total usable SGX protected memory in kilobytes.
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/sgx.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/sgx.h
>>> index 05f3e21f01a7..2ae9dc8c9411 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/sgx.h
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/sgx.h
>>> @@ -365,6 +365,13 @@ struct sgx_sigstruct {
>>> * comment!
>>> */
>>>
>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_X86_SGX) || defined(CONFIG_X86_SGX_KVM)
>>> +extern unsigned long sgx_nr_all_pages;
>>> +
>>> +int sgx_set_attribute(unsigned long *allowed_attributes,
>>> + unsigned int attribute_fd);
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_SGX_KVM
>>> int sgx_virt_ecreate(struct sgx_pageinfo *pageinfo, void __user *secs,
>>> int *trapnr);
>>> @@ -372,7 +379,4 @@ int sgx_virt_einit(void __user *sigstruct, void __user *token,
>>> void __user *secs, u64 *lepubkeyhash, int *trapnr);
>>> #endif
>>>
>>> -int sgx_set_attribute(unsigned long *allowed_attributes,
>>> - unsigned int attribute_fd);
>>> -
>>
>> This change seems unrelated?
>
> It's just a good practice not to define symbols that do not exist, so that
> if the symbol is ever used, we get a compilation error, not linking error.
>
> Since this is included to set_memory.c, based on this conclusion, I added
> the check.
>
It would make sense to make this change in a separate patch since.
thanks,
-- Shuah
Powered by blists - more mailing lists