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:   Sat, 15 Feb 2020 09:32:34 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To:     Jethro Beekman <jethro@fortanix.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        dave.hansen@intel.com, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com,
        nhorman@redhat.com, npmccallum@redhat.com, haitao.huang@intel.com,
        andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
        kai.svahn@intel.com, bp@alien8.de, josh@joshtriplett.org,
        luto@kernel.org, kai.huang@intel.com, rientjes@google.com,
        cedric.xing@intel.com, puiterwijk@redhat.com,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
        Haitao Huang <haitao.huang@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v26 10/22] x86/sgx: Linux Enclave Driver
Message-ID: <20200215073234.GD9958@linux.intel.com>
References: <20200209212609.7928-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20200209212609.7928-11-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <d17c50a7-6900-731b-43a2-d6e49b8eb44d@fortanix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <d17c50a7-6900-731b-43a2-d6e49b8eb44d@fortanix.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 Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 02:59:52PM +0100, Jethro Beekman wrote:
> Besides only partially measuring a page, there are some other fringe
> cases that are technically possible, although I haven't seen any
> toolchains that do that. These include not interleaving EADD and
> EEXTEND, not using logical ordering for the EEXTENDs, and call EEXTEND
> multiple times on the same chunk. Maximum interoperability would
> require supporting any EADD/EEXTEND sequence.

The reason why EEXTEND deals with chunks is nothing to do with the
granularity but just to amortize the algorithm. I did ask about this
and this is the answer that I got.

I think it is perfectly sane for Linux to define ABI here in at this
level.

> Tested-by: Jethro Beekman <jethro@fortanix.com>

Thanks you.

> Sorry for being super late with this, I know you asked me for feedback
> about this specific point in October. However, I did previously
> mention several times that being able to measure individual 256-byte
> chunks is necessary.

NP.

/Jarkko