Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-199573-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes
To: "Dmitrii Kuvaiskii" <dmitrii.kuvaiskii@intel.com>,
 dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, jarkko@kernel.org, kai.huang@intel.com,
 reinette.chatre@intel.com, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: mona.vij@intel.com, kailun.qin@intel.com, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/sgx: Resolve EREMOVE page vs EAUG page data
 race
References: <20240517110631.3441817-1-dmitrii.kuvaiskii@intel.com>
 <20240517110631.3441817-3-dmitrii.kuvaiskii@intel.com>
 <01bb6519-680e-45bf-b8bd-34763658aa17@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2024 13:42:49 -0500
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "Haitao Huang" <haitao.huang@linux.intel.com>
Organization: Intel
Message-ID: <op.2oszlnlowjvjmi@hhuan26-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <01bb6519-680e-45bf-b8bd-34763658aa17@intel.com>
User-Agent: Opera Mail/1.0 (Win32)

On Tue, 28 May 2024 11:23:13 -0500, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>  
wrote:

> On 5/17/24 04:06, Dmitrii Kuvaiskii wrote:
> ...
>
> First, why is SGX so special here?  How is the SGX problem different
> than what the core mm code does?
>
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/encl.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/encl.h
>> @@ -25,6 +25,9 @@
>>  /* 'desc' bit marking that the page is being reclaimed. */
>>  #define SGX_ENCL_PAGE_BEING_RECLAIMED	BIT(3)
>>
>> +/* 'desc' bit marking that the page is being removed. */
>> +#define SGX_ENCL_PAGE_BEING_REMOVED	BIT(2)
>
> Second, convince me that this _needs_ a new bit.  Why can't we just have
> a bit that effectively means "return EBUSY if you see this bit when
> handling a fault".
>

IIUC, reclaimer_writing_to_pcmd() also uses SGX_ENCL_PAGE_BEING_RECLAIMED  
to check if a page is about being reclaimed in order to prevent its VA  
slot fro being freed. So I think we do need separate bit for EREMOVE which  
does not write to VA slot?

BR
Haitao