From: "jarkko@kernel.org" <jarkko@kernel.org>
To: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@intel.com>
Cc: "pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de" <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>,
"linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org" <linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"Dhanraj, Vijay" <vijay.dhanraj@intel.com>,
"Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
"haitao.huang@linux.intel.com" <haitao.huang@linux.intel.com>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] x86/sgx: Do not consider unsanitized pages an error
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 06:40:46 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yw7YPjGHrM6X+WC+@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7d4e79a9b9751c479378dd0f21605dabc6507cc8.camel@intel.com>
On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 03:28:20AM +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 06:10 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 05:57:22AM +0300, jarkko@kernel.org wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 02:55:52AM +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 05:44 +0300, jarkko@kernel.org wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 02:35:53AM +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 05:15 +0300, jarkko@kernel.org wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 01:27:58AM +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 15:54 -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi Jarkko,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 8/29/2022 8:12 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > In sgx_init(), if misc_register() for the provision device fails, and
> > > > > > > > > > neither sgx_drv_init() nor sgx_vepc_init() succeeds, then ksgxd will be
> > > > > > > > > > prematurely stopped.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I do not think misc_register() is required to fail for the scenario to
> > > > > > > > > be triggered (rather use "or" than "and"?). Perhaps just
> > > > > > > > > "In sgx_init(), if a failure is encountered after ksgxd is started
> > > > > > > > > (via sgx_page_reclaimer_init()) ...".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > IMHO "a failure" might be too vague. For instance, failure to sgx_drv_init()
> > > > > > > > won't immediately result in ksgxd to stop prematurally. As long as KVM SGX can
> > > > > > > > be initialized successfully, sgx_init() still returns 0.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Btw I was thinking whether we should move sgx_page_reclaimer_init() to the end
> > > > > > > > of sgx_init(), after we make sure at least one of the driver and the KVM SGX is
> > > > > > > > initialized successfully. Then the code change in this patch won't be necessary
> > > > > > > > if I understand correctly. AFAICT there's no good reason to start the ksgxd at
> > > > > > > > early stage before we are sure either the driver or KVM SGX will work.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would focus fixing the existing flow rather than reinventing the flow.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It can be made to work, and therefore it is IMHO correct action to take.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From another perspective, the *existing flow* is the reason which causes this
> > > > > > bug. A real fix is to fix the flow itself.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any existing flow in part of the kernel can have a bug. That
> > > > > does not mean that switching flow would be proper way to fix
> > > > > a bug.
> > > > >
> > > > > BR, Jarkko
> > > >
> > > > Yes but I think this is only true when the flow is reasonable. If the flow
> > > > itself isn't reasonable, we should fix the flow (given it's easy to fix AFAICT).
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, let us also hear from others.
> > >
> > > The flow can be made to work without issues, which in the
> > > context of a bug fix is exactly what a bug fix should do.
> > > Not more or less.
> > >
> > > You don't gain any measurable value for the user with this
> > > switch idea.
> >
> > And besides this not proper way to review patch anyway because you did
> > not review the code.
> >
>
> I did review the code, but I couldn't agree on the fix. That's why I expressed
> my view here.
>
>
> > I'll focus on fix what is broken e.g. so that it
> > is easy to backport to stable and distro kernels, and call it a day.
> > It certainly does not have to make code "perfect", as long as known
> > bugs are sorted out.
>
> Why cannot the fix which fixes the flow go to stable?
>
> >
> > You are welcome to review the next version of the patch, once I've
> > resolved the issues that were pointed out by Reinette, if you still
> > see some issue but this type of speculative discussion is frankly just
> > wasting everyones time.
>
> Hmm.. Why pointing out a better fix (my perspective of course) is wasting
> everyone's time?
There was not a single inline comment.
BR, Jarkko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-31 3:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-30 3:12 [PATCH 0/6] x86/sgx: Test and fixes Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-30 3:12 ` [PATCH 1/6] x86/sgx: Do not consider unsanitized pages an error Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-30 22:54 ` Reinette Chatre
2022-08-31 1:27 ` Huang, Kai
2022-08-31 2:15 ` jarkko
2022-08-31 2:35 ` Huang, Kai
2022-08-31 2:44 ` jarkko
2022-08-31 2:55 ` Huang, Kai
2022-08-31 2:57 ` jarkko
2022-08-31 3:10 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-31 3:28 ` Huang, Kai
2022-08-31 3:40 ` jarkko [this message]
2022-08-31 3:17 ` Huang, Kai
2022-08-31 15:18 ` Haitao Huang
2022-08-31 18:28 ` jarkko
2022-08-31 18:35 ` Dave Hansen
2022-08-31 18:44 ` jarkko
2022-08-31 18:45 ` jarkko
2022-08-31 20:42 ` Huang, Kai
2022-09-01 22:27 ` jarkko
2022-09-01 22:41 ` Huang, Kai
2022-09-01 23:58 ` jarkko
2022-09-02 0:26 ` Huang, Kai
2022-08-31 1:55 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-31 1:58 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-31 2:01 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-31 18:08 ` Reinette Chatre
2022-08-30 3:12 ` [PATCH 2/6] x86/sgx: Handle VA page allocation failure for EAUG on PF Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-30 22:54 ` Reinette Chatre
2022-08-30 3:12 ` [PATCH 3/6] selftests/sgx: Ignore OpenSSL 3.0 deprecated functions warning Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-30 18:18 ` Reinette Chatre
2022-08-31 1:07 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-30 3:12 ` [PATCH 4/6] selftests/sgx: Add SGX selftest augment_via_eaccept_long Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-30 22:55 ` Reinette Chatre
2022-08-31 2:28 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-31 18:09 ` Reinette Chatre
2022-09-01 22:16 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-09-01 23:11 ` Reinette Chatre
2022-09-02 0:00 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-09-02 0:02 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-30 3:12 ` [PATCH 5/6] selftests/sgx: retry the ioctls returned with EAGAIN Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-30 22:56 ` Reinette Chatre
2022-08-31 2:31 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-31 18:09 ` Reinette Chatre
2022-09-01 22:17 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-31 18:14 ` Dave Hansen
2022-09-01 22:18 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-30 3:12 ` [PATCH 6/6] selftests/sgx: Add a bpftrace script for tracking allocation errors Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-30 22:57 ` Reinette Chatre
2022-08-31 2:33 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-31 18:10 ` Reinette Chatre
2022-08-31 18:23 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-08-31 18:23 ` Dave Hansen
2022-09-01 22:20 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2022-09-01 22:34 ` Dave Hansen
2022-09-01 23:55 ` 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=Yw7YPjGHrM6X+WC+@kernel.org \
--to=jarkko@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=haitao.huang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kai.huang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de \
--cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vijay.dhanraj@intel.com \
--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