Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: LJZLoxAzy9G0ke2lwAAgbXMjo3Vt6bSMYVx223lgF64g2Ujpy+SRVbnw5cZBfz0NAe8h+Thfvj
 slKpKe/BXFIw==
IronPort-SDR: McQFZ+HU6pS6AMx8kgnQoBmj2AbLEYkA16e3Ed5j+rhddu+/mKXrtp5Fp6g5pJqYnWqUzhp1Xs
 p9egGDJLKkGw==
Date:   Fri, 22 May 2020 22:50:17 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        x86@kernel.org, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, dave.hansen@intel.com,
        nhorman@redhat.com, npmccallum@redhat.com, haitao.huang@intel.com,
        andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
        kai.svahn@intel.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, luto@kernel.org,
        kai.huang@intel.com, rientjes@google.com, cedric.xing@intel.com,
        puiterwijk@redhat.com, Jethro Beekman <jethro@fortanix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v30 04/20] x86/sgx: Add SGX microarchitectural data
 structures
Message-ID: <20200522195017.GA121470@linux.intel.com>
References: <20200515004410.723949-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20200515004410.723949-5-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20200520184745.GJ1457@zn.tnic>
 <20200522155405.GA8377@linux.intel.com>
 <20200522161326.GC25128@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200522161326.GC25128@linux.intel.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 09:13:26AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 06:54:05PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 08:47:45PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 03:43:54AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > > +/**
> > > > + * struct sgx_sigstruct_header -  defines author of the enclave
> > > > + * @header1:		constant byte string
> > > > + * @vendor:		must be either 0x0000 or 0x8086
> > > 
> > > Out of pure curiosity: what is that about?
> > > 
> > > Nothing in the patchset enforces this, so hw does? If so, why?
> > > 
> > > Are those vendor IDs going to be assigned by someone or what's up?
> > > 
> > > Thx.
> > 
> > In SGX1 world 0x8086 was used to mark architectural enclaves and 0x0000
> > user run enclaves. In SGX2 world they are irrelevant.
> 
> That's not accurate, the vendor is irrelevant in all SGX eras, e.g. enclaves
> signed by someone other than Intel can use 0x8086 on SGX1 hardware and even
> pre-LC hardware.  0x8086 is/was used as an _informal_ "this is an
> Intel-signed enclave", but in no way was it mandatory or reliable.
> 
> > In order to retain compatiblity I'd add an explicit check to:
> > 
> > 1. Allow vendor ID of 0x0000 or 0x8086.
> > 2. Reject other vendor ID's (-EINVAL).
> 
> Unless we also check the reserved fields in sigstruct, I don't see the
> point.  Even then, I don't understand what the kernel gains from enforcing
> anything with respect to sigstruct.  Enforcing the SECS makes sense as we
> don't want to allow userspace to enable some unknown future feature.  But
> sigstruct is purely for verification, we (Intel) have far bigger problems
> if Intel is enabling new behavior via sigstruct.
> 
> That being said, I'm not dead set against sanity checking sigstruct, I just
> think it'd be a waste of cycles.

If other values except two are never going to be used it is more than a
legit point to validate this field.

It also the potential to use ~0x8086 bits to be defined later if ever
needed lets say for some kernel specific purpose.

/Jarkko