linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 00/18] Add Cgroup support for SGX EPC memory

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: <ZQShw25UBVvVvjQo@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date:   Fri, 15 Sep 2023 08:26:11 -1000
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     Haitao Huang <haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     jarkko@...nel.org, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com,
        sohil.mehta@...el.com, zhiquan1.li@...el.com,
        kristen@...ux.intel.com, seanjc@...gle.com, zhanb@...rosoft.com,
        anakrish@...rosoft.com, mikko.ylinen@...ux.intel.com,
        yangjie@...rosoft.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/18] Add Cgroup support for SGX EPC memory

On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:06:17PM -0700, Haitao Huang wrote:
> SGX EPC memory allocations are separate from normal RAM allocations, and
> are managed solely by the SGX subsystem. The existing cgroup memory
> controller cannot be used to limit or account for SGX EPC memory, which is
> a desirable feature in some environments, e.g., support for pod level
> control in a Kubernates cluster on a VM or baremetal host [1,2].
> 
> This patchset implements the support for sgx_epc memory within the misc
> cgroup controller. The user can use the misc cgroup controller to set and
> enforce a max limit on total EPC usage per cgroup. The implementation
> reports current usage and events of reaching the limit per cgroup as well
> as the total system capacity.

Minor nit aside, it looks fine from cgroup side.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun