linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] x86/sgx: Add the missing ifdef for sgx_set

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3980adde9c05963790215e99d566740059da6870.camel@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 26 Aug 2021 20:31:13 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] x86/sgx: Add the missing ifdef for
 sgx_set_attribute()

On Thu, 2021-08-26 at 19:24 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 08:11:27PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > Is your preference is to have in set_memory.c:
> 
> My preference is to take fixes only for actual problems which can be
> triggered with some config - not something you're doing locally.

The actual problem is to use it in set_memory.c.

This the unsplit version:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-sgx/20210818132509.545997-1-jarkko@kernel.org/

Should I just squash them again into one patch?

I did the split because of earlier review comments.

/Jarkko