Some non-technical staff:From what I see:
On Tue, 2023-09-12 at 21:06 -0700, Haitao Huang wrote:
From: Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
The patch was from Kristen, but ...
Introduce a data structure to wrap the existing reclaimable list and its
spinlock. Each cgroup later will have one instance of this structure to
track EPC pages allocated for processes associated with the same cgroup.
Just like the global SGX reclaimer (ksgxd), an EPC cgroup reclaims pages
from the reclaimable list in this structure when its usage reaches near
its limit.
Currently, ksgxd does not track the VA, SECS pages. They are considered
as 'unreclaimable' pages that are only deallocated when their respective
owning enclaves are destroyed and all associated resources released.
When an EPC cgroup can not reclaim any more reclaimable EPC pages to
reduce its usage below its limit, the cgroup must also reclaim those
unreclaimables by killing their owning enclaves. The VA and SECS pages
later are also tracked in an 'unreclaimable' list added to this structure
to support this OOM killing of enclaves.
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
... it was firstly signed by Sean and then Kristen, which doesn't sound right.
If the patch was from Kristen, then either Sean's SoB should come after
Kristen's (which means Sean took Kristen's patch and signed it), or you need to
have a Co-developed-by tag for Sean right before his SoB (which indicates Sean
participated in the development of the patch but likely he wasn't the main
developer).
But I _guess_ the patch was just from Sean.