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:   Mon, 5 Nov 2018 16:37:49 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc:     "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@kernel.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, nhorman@redhat.com,
        npmccallum@redhat.com, serge.ayoun@intel.com,
        shay.katz-zamir@intel.com, haitao.huang@intel.com,
        mark.shanahan@intel.com,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        davidwang@zhaoxin.com,
        "Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)" <alexander.levin@verizon.com>,
        qianyue.zj@alibaba-inc.com,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 14/23] x86/cpu/intel: Clear SGX_LC capability if not
 enabled in FEATURE_CONTROL
Message-ID: <20181105143749.GB2798@linux.intel.com>
References: <20181102231320.29164-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20181102231320.29164-15-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <CAHp75VctUJRTecG4rVHXm0uO18ZndMgqJgtNyG25HtSzJF5uzg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VctUJRTecG4rVHXm0uO18ZndMgqJgtNyG25HtSzJF5uzg@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Nov 03, 2018 at 03:15:15PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > @@ -618,6 +618,8 @@ static void detect_sgx(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> >                 setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_SGX1);
> >                 setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_SGX2);
> >         }
> > +       if (unsupported || !(fc & FEATURE_CONTROL_SGX_LE_WR))
> > +               setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_SGX_LC);
> >  }
> 
> A-ha, I see how you use this variable here (though it's still possible
> to get rid of it, choose what is better for readability /
> maintenance).

I would propose to squash this one to the earlier commit and refactor
it in a way that I proposed. Having this part as a separate commit in
my opinion is a bit confusing.

/Jarkko