linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 12/18] x86/sgx: Add EPC OOM path to forcefully reclaim EPC

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: <op.2cpecbevwjvjmi@hhuan26-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Oct 2023 08:27:37 -0500
From:   "Haitao Huang" <haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "Christopherson,, Sean" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
Cc:     "Zhang, Bo" <zhanb@...rosoft.com>,
        "linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org>,
        "cgroups@...r.kernel.org" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
        "yangjie@...rosoft.com" <yangjie@...rosoft.com>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Li, Zhiquan1" <zhiquan1.li@...el.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>,
        "anakrish@...rosoft.com" <anakrish@...rosoft.com>,
        "jarkko@...nel.org" <jarkko@...nel.org>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "mikko.ylinen@...ux.intel.com" <mikko.ylinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Mehta, Sohil" <sohil.mehta@...el.com>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "kristen@...ux.intel.com" <kristen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 12/18] x86/sgx: Add EPC OOM path to forcefully reclaim
 EPC

On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 19:51:17 -0500, Huang, Kai <kai.huang@...el.com> wrote:
[...]
> (btw, even you track VA/SECS pages in unreclaimable list, given they  
> both have
> 'enclave' as the owner,  do you still need SGX_EPC_OWNER_ENCL and
> SGX_EPC_OWNER_PAGE ?)

Let me think about it, there might be also a way just track encl objects  
not unreclaimable pages.

I still not get why we need kill the VM not just remove just enough pages.  
Is it due to the static allocation not able to reclaim?


If we always remove all vEPC pages/kill VM, then we should not need track  
individual vepc pages.

Thanks

Haitao