Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 27 Sep 2018 16:14:18 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc:     X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        "Christopherson, Sean J" <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        nhorman@redhat.com, npmccallum@redhat.com,
        "Ayoun, Serge" <serge.ayoun@intel.com>, shay.katz-zamir@intel.com,
        linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 09/19] x86/mm: x86/sgx: Signal SEGV_SGXERR for #PFs
 w/ PF_SGX
Message-ID: <20180927131418.GD5436@linux.intel.com>
References: <20180925130845.9962-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20180925130845.9962-10-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <CALCETrVAhiwv+g5fzVO3ZSHZgcQKbeeG8r3HUcXO9k7Gi94NdQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrVAhiwv+g5fzVO3ZSHZgcQKbeeG8r3HUcXO9k7Gi94NdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 03:53:48PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Minor nit:
> 
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 6:12 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
> >
> 
> > by (c) as the kernel doesn't really have any other reasonable option,
> > e.g. we could kill the task or panic, but neither is warranted.
> 
> Not killing the task is quite nice, but...
> 
> > +       /*
> > +        * Access is blocked by the Enclave Page Cache Map (EPCM),
> > +        * i.e. the access is allowed by the PTE but not the EPCM.
> > +        * This usually happens when the EPCM is yanked out from
> > +        * under us, e.g. by hardware after a suspend/resume cycle.
> > +        * In any case, there is nothing that can be done by the
> > +        * kernel to resolve the fault (short of killing the task).
> 
> Maybe s/killing the task/sending a signal/?

Agreed. Thanks. 

/Jarkko