Re: [PATCH] x86/sgx: Allows ioctl PROVISION to execute before CREATE

[Tianjia Zhang]

On 1/21/21 6:37 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:34:49AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:57:18AM +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 1/20/21 4:05 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
> > > > > In function sgx_encl_create(), the logic of directly assigning
> > > > > value to attributes_mask determines that the call to
> > > > > SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_PROVISION must be after the command of
> > > > > SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_CREATE. If change this assignment statement to
> > > > > or operation, the PROVISION command can be executed earlier and
> > > > > more flexibly.
> > > > >
> > > > > Reported-by: Jia Zhang <zhang.jia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >    arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c | 2 +-
> > > > >    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> > > > > index f45957c05f69..0ca3fc238bc2 100644
> > > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> > > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> > > > > @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ static int sgx_encl_create(struct sgx_encl *encl, struct sgx_secs *secs)
> > > > >    	encl->base = secs->base;
> > > > >    	encl->size = secs->size;
> > > > >    	encl->attributes = secs->attributes;
> > > > > -	encl->attributes_mask = SGX_ATTR_DEBUG | SGX_ATTR_MODE64BIT | SGX_ATTR_KSS;
> > > > > +	encl->attributes_mask |= SGX_ATTR_DEBUG | SGX_ATTR_MODE64BIT | SGX_ATTR_KSS;
> > > >
> > > > Alternatively, move the existing code to sgx_open()?  Initializing the field
> > > > when the encl object is allocated feels more correct.
> > >
> > >
> > > This seems like a good idea. Thanks for your suggestion. I have sent v2
> > > patch, include the next two patches.
> >
> > Did you ask from Sean about suggested-by's? Now it looks like
> > that doing these patches were originally proposed by Sean.
>
> Please do not add tags from people *unauthentically*. I do not
> see anything from Sean to any of the patches that would suggest
> adding those tags. You are basically just stamping that to all
> patches, which he has given a code review. Can you stop doing
> this?
>
> /Jarkko

I am very sorry for the trouble caused to you, I have made improvements 
in the new patch, thanks for your suggestions.

Best regards,
Tianjia