From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8941B2DC770; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 15:16:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746026186; cv=none; b=IJczuzo1Dmk4IT+aGywYujSV+HcZBw5OXnWfEj/CRBORndWfJxiuNERMy/aNKrfVJZwkTRAFD1bApXs6GXUkBtWNli7wP1+z8mfLHbbkemL36Kwbo/ZGaeGVSIa6SE5rTccyMVblgF1ZBUloOINXQMlm4VnesE4wHI5U6o0PJkg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746026186; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ttE3sHexDRAFmrcQqUiwsk+71nttsmLhwmVo1OAt7Hg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Jp10+M8C+GEkYP+x5eHZ5H/eQnByQt4ikWG0WfOb/HIATlmwfkNtjfa3OSAzo/KA/pXk8ewkdCcqDv+zfV2ZjRmy1BW3Z7O70Nxpijua7V+sbQf1o/LA6PgzGZEdK3udLkSSd6iKE1AqAXiidRC58YHJ6sp2Jc7nsRbeD2ijb6U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=DvhRgt58; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="DvhRgt58" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6CBC3C4CEE7; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 15:16:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1746026186; bh=ttE3sHexDRAFmrcQqUiwsk+71nttsmLhwmVo1OAt7Hg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=DvhRgt58tN19SSfK2+EAbkO3AE73rZHsBsXTJrj8M80KRzi6RoRRGoaqZUXgOh0tr 3pGuLtybBhrxk6/pB9g3m6HKKzPIu48m4MvhMYhpQGCtmJsvs4jjcNDsDZcmt6DeET qT23czBnKG2hpq0qBmq3CfbA32/UhtDniygBLVT/0nd3CUqezY1FrFbP10tEIwFk96 a4aWnwNjF9xDqBWWnhgVPNCZZmvgb/jwPaAHN52p6nbcrF246Ir9IZkZcQ+igE1hBY 7XyOJjt9P5CCDEkcACuv+ZGDXiU/VRB4OnNQtRIVSKcXVXMeLOagNKpeFDw9Cs088c 11gzEP0hw9HDg== Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 18:16:21 +0300 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: "Reshetova, Elena" Cc: "Hansen, Dave" , Sean Christopherson , "Huang, Kai" , "linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org" , "Scarlata, Vincent R" , "x86@kernel.org" , "Annapurve, Vishal" , "Cai, Chong" , "Mallick, Asit K" , "Aktas, Erdem" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "bondarn@google.com" , "dionnaglaze@google.com" , "Raynor, Scott" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/sgx: Implement EUPDATESVN and opportunistically call it during first EPC page alloc Message-ID: References: <0d7d6b9a-e7bd-4225-8f08-05bd9473a894@intel.com> <4b4ecaa1-2ace-43bf-b71b-0de78bcf113c@intel.com> <8db47bc1-445b-49db-b932-96aff0eb58a9@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 06:53:32AM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote: > 2. Switch to Sean's approach to execute EUPDATESVN during the sgx_open(). > Btw, Sean do you agree that we don't gain much doing it second time during > release() given the microcode flow? > I would rather leave only one invocation of eupdatesvn during sgx_inc_usage_count(). > > Proc: No new uABI. More predictable on svn change compared to option 1. > Cons: Two explicit paths to hook: sgx_open() and sgx_vepc_open(). Why this is a con? BR, Jarkko