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: zf8lCfXOSOburnJRLQ1IA11cbqAKffmO9pTxcaFfag81YGszskYOi5O8fdI8cQVrBeQ4djGy/6
 k/QLdpcWm35A==
IronPort-SDR: k2nXBRs3QZ/XH/H9tsrKtVoFHbmFvvLaTJOUIBX3JQUhqZzb+Y4WMU1JEup+QY7ajzeCGuF+Ay
 1DbaPSHJ13Uw==
Date:   Fri, 23 Oct 2020 13:14:08 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc:     x86@kernel.org, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        Jethro Beekman <jethro@fortanix.com>,
        Darren Kenny <darren.kenny@oracle.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, asapek@google.com, bp@alien8.de,
        cedric.xing@intel.com, chenalexchen@google.com,
        conradparker@google.com, cyhanish@google.com,
        haitao.huang@intel.com, kai.huang@intel.com, kai.svahn@intel.com,
        kmoy@google.com, ludloff@google.com, nhorman@redhat.com,
        npmccallum@redhat.com, puiterwijk@redhat.com, rientjes@google.com,
        sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
        yaozhangx@google.com, mikko.ylinen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v39 15/24] x86/sgx: Add SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_PROVISION
Message-ID: <20201023101408.GF168477@linux.intel.com>
References: <20201003045059.665934-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20201003045059.665934-16-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <91637b13-c0ee-82bd-05cd-5ce848004eae@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <91637b13-c0ee-82bd-05cd-5ce848004eae@intel.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:48:54AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >  int __init sgx_drv_init(void)
> >  {
> >  	unsigned int eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
> > @@ -181,5 +192,12 @@ int __init sgx_drv_init(void)
> >  		return ret;
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	ret = misc_register(&sgx_dev_provision);
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		pr_err("Creating /dev/sgx/provision failed with %d.\n", ret);
> > +		misc_deregister(&sgx_dev_enclave);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> 
> Isn't it a *bit* too specific to say that a device file failed to be
> created?  Do other misc devices use this kind of message?

Before seeing this I had already removed it. It is incosistent at
least and quite useless error really. We have tracing tools for
this.

/Jarkko