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;
Date:   Thu, 25 Jun 2020 20:45:38 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        Jethro Beekman <jethro@fortanix.com>,
        Haitao Huang <haitao.huang@linux.intel.com>,
        Chunyang Hui <sanqian.hcy@antfin.com>,
        Jordan Hand <jorhand@linux.microsoft.com>,
        Nathaniel McCallum <npmccallum@redhat.com>,
        Seth Moore <sethmo@google.com>,
        Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com,
        asapek@google.com, cedric.xing@intel.com, chenalexchen@google.com,
        conradparker@google.com, cyhanish@google.com,
        dave.hansen@intel.com, haitao.huang@intel.com,
        josh@joshtriplett.org, kai.huang@intel.com, kai.svahn@intel.com,
        kmoy@google.com, ludloff@google.com, luto@kernel.org,
        nhorman@redhat.com, puiterwijk@redhat.com, rientjes@google.com,
        tglx@linutronix.de, yaozhangx@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v33 11/21] x86/sgx: Linux Enclave Driver
Message-ID: <20200625184538.GM20319@zn.tnic>
References: <20200617220844.57423-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20200617220844.57423-12-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20200625172319.GJ20319@zn.tnic>
 <20200625183448.GG3437@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200625183448.GG3437@linux.intel.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 11:34:48AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Hmm, I think the most reasonable way to break up this beast would be to
> incrementally introduce functionality.  E.g. four or so patches, one for
> each ioctl() of ENCLAVE_CREATE, ENCLAVE_ADD_PAGES, ENCLAVE_INIT and
> ENCLAVE_SET_ATTRIBUTE, in that order.

Yeah, I guess I can try reviewing it this way too and address each ioctl
separately. You can try splitting later so that we don't waste time now.
It would be good to have it split eventually, though, so that it is more
palatable for other rewiewers too...

> Splitting up by file probably wouldn't work very well.  The split is
> pretty arbitrary, e.g. encl.[ch] isn't simply a pure representation of an
> enclave, there is a lot of the driver details/dependencies in there, i.e.
> the functionality between encl/ioctl/driver is all pretty intertwined.

... provided the functionality is not too intertwined to make a split
actually worse than a single big patch.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette