[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6e8e933e-aa00-44c9-91f2-b50b96d6c604@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2025 09:45:27 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>
Cc: jarkko@...nel.org, seanjc@...gle.com, kai.huang@...el.com,
mingo@...nel.org, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, asit.k.mallick@...el.com, vincent.r.scarlata@...el.com,
chongc@...gle.com, erdemaktas@...gle.com, vannapurve@...gle.com,
bondarn@...gle.com, scott.raynor@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 2/6] x86/sgx: Introduce functions to count the
sgx_(vepc_)open()
On 8/1/25 04:25, Elena Reshetova wrote:
> Note: the sgx_inc_usage_count prototype is defined to return
> int for the cleanliness of the follow-up patches. When the
> EUPDATESVN SGX instruction will be enabled in the follow-up patch,
> the sgx_inc_usage_count will start to return int.
Please use parenthesis for function_names().
Second, sgx_inc_usage_count() _already_ returns 'int'. Now. In this patch.
So I'm confused what this is trying to say.
Is this trying to say that sgx_inc_usage_count() always returns success
(0) for now, but the future implementation can fail? *That's* why it
needs to have an 'int' return type.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists