[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0fb14185-5cc3-a963-253d-2e119b4a52bb@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 09:43:38 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
Cc: dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, tglx@...utronix.de, bp@...en8.de,
luto@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, seanjc@...gle.com, kai.huang@...el.com,
cathy.zhang@...el.com, cedric.xing@...el.com,
haitao.huang@...el.com, mark.shanahan@...el.com, hpa@...or.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/25] x86/sgx: Support modifying SGX page type
On 12/11/21 12:02 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-12-06 at 13:48 -0800, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>>> I'd suggest to change this as SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_MODIFY_TYPE.
>> How about SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_MOD_TYPE to be consistent with your earlier
>> suggestion of SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_MOD_PROTECTIONS ?
> I think it would be best to introduce only one new ioctl that would
> be capable of doing either operation (and use secinfo as a vessel
> for additional data).
Why?
I don't think we should try to multiplex within an ioctl(). Just create
a second ioctl().
Powered by blists - more mailing lists