[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <abfc00a2ab1d97f8081c696f78e2d0ced23902b4.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2022 13:40:26 -0800
From: Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, jarkko@...nel.org,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, tj@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: zhiquan1.li@...el.com, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/18] x86/sgx: Store struct sgx_encl when allocating
new VA pages
On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 13:35 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 12/2/22 10:36, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
> > When allocating new Version Array (VA) pages, pass the struct
> > sgx_encl
> > of the enclave that is allocating the page. sgx_alloc_epc_page()
> > will
> > store this value in the encl_owner field of the struct
> > sgx_epc_page. In
> > a later patch, VA pages will be placed in an unreclaimable queue,
> > and then when the cgroup max limit is reached and there are no more
> > reclaimable pages and the enclave must be oom killed, all the
> > VA pages associated with that enclave can be uncharged and freed.
>
> What does this have to do with the 'encl' that is being passed,
> though?
>
> In other words, why is this new sgx_epc_page-to-encl mapping needed
> for
> VA pages now, but it wasn't before?
When we OOM kill an enclave, we want to get rid of all the associated
VA pages too. Prior to this patch, there wasn't a way to easily get the
VA pages associated with an enclave.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists