From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarkko Sakkinen Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 09/13] x86/sgx: Enclave Page Cache (EPC) memory manager Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 11:35:40 +0300 Message-ID: <20180828083540.GH15508@linux.intel.com> References: <20180827185507.17087-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <20180827185507.17087-10-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> <7c5df14e-3028-46b3-fe93-aa6ba8352317@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7c5df14e-3028-46b3-fe93-aa6ba8352317@intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dave Hansen Cc: x86@kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, nhorman@redhat.com, npmccallum@redhat.com, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Suresh Siddha , Serge Ayoun , "open list:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" List-Id: platform-driver-x86.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 02:15:34PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 08/27/2018 11:53 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > +struct sgx_epc_page_ops { > > + bool (*get)(struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page); > > + void (*put)(struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page); > > + bool (*reclaim)(struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page); > > + void (*block)(struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page); > > + void (*write)(struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page); > > +}; > > Why do we need a fancy, slow (retpoline'd) set of function pointers when > we only have one user of these (the SGX driver)? KVM has its own implementation for these operations. /Jarkko