linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/6] selftests/sgx: retry the ioctls returned with EAGAIN

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: <YxEvkp3RNpZmLr6b@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 2 Sep 2022 01:17:54 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To:     Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
Cc:     linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
        Haitao Huang <haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com>,
        Vijay Dhanraj <vijay.dhanraj@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] selftests/sgx: retry the ioctls returned with EAGAIN

On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 11:09:21AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Jarkko,
> 
> On 8/30/2022 7:31 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 03:56:29PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> >> Hi Haitao and Jarkko,
> >>
> >>
> >> selftests/sgx: Retry the ioctl()s returned with EAGAIN
> >>
> >>
> >> On 8/29/2022 8:12 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> >>> From: Haitao Huang <haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com>
> >>>
> >>> For EMODT and EREMOVE ioctls with a large range, kernel
> >>
> >> ioctl()s?
> > 
> > Ioctl is common enough to be considered as noun and is
> > widely phrased like that in commit messages. I don't
> > see any added clarity.
> 
> ok. I was asked to make this change in the SGX2 patches and
> thought that I should propagate this advice :)

I can use the other form too, np.

> 
> >>> +			modt_ioc.count = 0;
> >>> +		} else
> >>> +			break;
> >>
> >> Watch out for unbalanced braces (also later in patch). This causes
> >> checkpatch.pl noise.
> > 
> > Again. I did run checkpatch to all of these. Will revisit.
> 
> It looks like I see it because I use "checkpatch.pl --strict".

Thanks BTW for pointing this out :-)

> Reinette

BR, Jarkko