From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
Cc: Kai Huang <kai.huang@intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, dave.hansen@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/sgx: Avoid returning NULL in __sgx_alloc_epc_page()
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 16:52:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210319155249.GK6251@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YFTB0HD/4Hc0KvT3@kernel.org>
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 05:22:56PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> I did misread it for the first time.
>
> So let's sanity: you *are* going to squash the patches together because
> that way it's factors easier to backport the whole thing?
>
> Is this the correct understanding?
I squashed Kai's fix because I don't want to break people's bisection if
they land between your patch and his fix. They're already troubled enough
chasing an issue, don't want to have them get a NULL ptr in sgx land.
Now, looking at dhansen's fix: what can happen if nid is uninitialized?
AFAICT, we'll end up in
static inline int __next_node(int n, const nodemask_t *srcp)
{
return min_t(int,MAX_NUMNODES,find_next_bit(srcp->bits, MAX_NUMNODES, n+1));
}
with n uninitialized and depending on its value it'll either return
MAX_NUMNODES so we'll try to allocate on the first node or try to
allocate on some other node.
Now, if you think that that is still problematic enough for enclave
creation, then I'll fold his patch too.
So yes, the main reason is usability and not breaking bisection.
So, what would you prefer?
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-19 15:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-19 4:06 [PATCH] x86/sgx: Avoid returning NULL in __sgx_alloc_epc_page() Kai Huang
2021-03-19 5:42 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-03-19 8:45 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-03-19 9:01 ` Kai Huang
2021-03-19 9:12 ` Kai Huang
2021-03-19 14:50 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-03-19 14:59 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-03-19 15:22 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-03-19 15:52 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2021-03-19 15:59 ` Dave Hansen
2021-03-19 16:09 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-03-19 14:49 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210319155249.GK6251@zn.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jarkko@kernel.org \
--cc=kai.huang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox