RE: [PATCH V4 00/31] x86/sgx and selftests/sgx: Support SGX2

[Dhanraj, Vijay]

Hi Jarkko,

I am working on enabling Gramine with this EDMM patch series. I had tested with V2 patch series and it looked fine. Will evaluate Gramine with V4 patch series and post my updates in a couple of days.

Regards,
-Vijay

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2022 9:56 AM
> To: Chatre, Reinette <reinette.chatre@xxxxxxxxx>;
> dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; bp@xxxxxxxxx; Lutomirski,
> Andy <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>; mingo@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-sgx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> x86@xxxxxxxxxx; shuah@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-kselftest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Christopherson,, Sean <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>; Huang, Kai
> <kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx>; Zhang, Cathy <cathy.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>; Xing,
> Cedric <cedric.xing@xxxxxxxxx>; Huang, Haitao <haitao.huang@xxxxxxxxx>;
> Shanahan, Mark <mark.shanahan@xxxxxxxxx>; Dhanraj, Vijay
> <vijay.dhanraj@xxxxxxxxx>; hpa@xxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 00/31] x86/sgx and selftests/sgx: Support SGX2
> 
> On Thu, 2022-04-14 at 09:34 -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> > Hi Jarkko,
> >
> > On 4/14/2022 4:25 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2022-04-13 at 14:10 -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> > > IMHO, we can pull this after +1 version. I think I had only one nit
> > > (one character to a struct name it was), and I've been testing this
> > > series *extensively* with real-world code (wasm run-time that we are
> > > developing), so I'm confident that  it is *good enough*.
> >
> > Thank you very much. I am aware of other teams successfully building
> > on and testing this work. I do hope that they could also provide an
> > ack to help increase the confidence in this work.
> >
> > >
> > > Reinette, for the EMODT patch, as long as you fix the struct name
> > > you can add my reviewed-by and also tested-by to that patch before
> > > you send it! It's so narrow change.
> >
> > Thank you. I will make the struct name change and also plan to make
> > the same change to the function names in that patch to ensure that
> > everything is consistent in that regard.
> 
> I think getting ack from anyone working Graphene-SGX would bring a great
> coverage of different use cases. It's different same of Enarx in the sense that
> both can run arbitrary applicatons written e.g. with C++ although approaches
> are on opposite sides.
> 
> > Reinette
> 
> BR; Jarkko