Re: [PATCH v2 14/18] x86/sgx: Add EPC OOM path to forcefully reclaim EPC

[Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>]

On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 06:09:39PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2022, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > On 12/9/22 08:05, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
> > > Aside from that though, I don't think that killing enclaves makes sense
> > > outside the context of cgroup limits. 
> > 
> > I think it makes a lot of sense in theory.  Whatever situation we get
> > into with a cgroup's EPC we can also get into with the whole system's EPC.
> > 
> > *But*, it's orders of magnitude harder to hit on the whole system.
> 
> ...
> 
> > If someone wants to extend this OOM support to system-wide EPC later, then go
> > ahead.  But, I don't think it makes a lot of sense to invert this series for
> > it.
> 
> +1 from the peanut gallery.  With VMM EPC oversubscription suport, no sane VMM
> will oversubscribe VEPC pages.  And for VA pages, supporting swap of VA pages is
> likely a more userspace-friendly approach if system-wide EPC OOM is a concern.

When swapping VA pages the topology of the VA page cache for swapped VA
pages is the main question. It is compromise between how long swap-in and
swap-out can take, and how generic solution it be, meaning how deep
hierarchies you want to build, or is just a flat list of parent VA pages
"good enough".

Also, there's the question whether it should be a global cache, per cgroup
and so forth.

Implementing any solution is not overly complicated. Locking in these
options is what puzzles me.

BR, Jarkko