Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-209887-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes
To: "dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
 "tj@kernel.org" <tj@kernel.org>, "mkoutny@suse.com" <mkoutny@suse.com>,
 "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
 "linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org" <linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org>, "x86@kernel.org"
 <x86@kernel.org>, "cgroups@vger.kernel.org" <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
 "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>, "mingo@redhat.com"
 <mingo@redhat.com>, "bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>, "hpa@zytor.com"
 <hpa@zytor.com>, "Mehta, Sohil" <sohil.mehta@intel.com>,
 "tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com" <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>, "Jarkko Sakkinen"
 <jarkko@kernel.org>, "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@intel.com>
Cc: "Li, Zhiquan1" <zhiquan1.li@intel.com>, "kristen@linux.intel.com"
 <kristen@linux.intel.com>, "seanjc@google.com" <seanjc@google.com>, "Zhang,
 Bo" <zhanb@microsoft.com>, "anakrish@microsoft.com" <anakrish@microsoft.com>,
 "mikko.ylinen@linux.intel.com" <mikko.ylinen@linux.intel.com>,
 "yangjie@microsoft.com" <yangjie@microsoft.com>, "chrisyan@microsoft.com"
 <chrisyan@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 14/14] selftests/sgx: Add scripts for EPC cgroup
 testing
References: <20240531222630.4634-1-haitao.huang@linux.intel.com>
 <20240531222630.4634-15-haitao.huang@linux.intel.com>
 <D1RKK8CENNXI.1KMNDADV9C1YM@kernel.org>
 <op.2owf5xiwwjvjmi@hhuan26-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com>
 <D1SOT40TEXMI.A5J72PR5IWSP@kernel.org>
 <op.2ox4ccz7wjvjmi@hhuan26-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com>
 <eb36980a-2a81-426b-82fb-7f598f7a0037@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:57:19 -0500
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "Haitao Huang" <haitao.huang@linux.intel.com>
Organization: Intel
Message-ID: <op.2o7cxtg8wjvjmi@hhuan26-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <eb36980a-2a81-426b-82fb-7f598f7a0037@intel.com>
User-Agent: Opera Mail/1.0 (Win32)

On Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:39:53 -0500, Huang, Kai <kai.huang@intel.com> wrote:

>
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c
>> @@ -1045,7 +1045,7 @@ static int __init sgx_init(void)
>>        if (!sgx_page_cache_init())
>>            return -ENOMEM;
>>  -    if (!sgx_page_reclaimer_init()) {
>> +    if (!sgx_page_reclaimer_init() || !sgx_cgroup_init()) {
>>            ret = -ENOMEM;
>>            goto err_page_cache;
>>        }
>
> Does it make more sense to move the sgx_cgroup_init() to the  
> sgx_drv_init()?  The SGX cgroup only works for the driver side anyway.  
> In this case, if something went wrong in sgx_cgroup_init(), the  
> sgx_vepc_init() could still have a chance to work.
>

vepc reclamation is not done by cgroup/ksgxd but try_charge() won't work  
if user expecting cgroup to limit vepc allocation. Would it be more  
consistent to just disable vepc, i.e., on system with MISC, sgx/vepc  
always go with cgroup enabled?

> And IIUC we need to reset the "capacity" to 0 if sgx_cgroup_init()  
> fails, no matter it is called inside sgx_drv_init() or sgx_init(),  
> otherwise the "epc" would appear in the cgroup hierarchy as a misc  
> cgroup resource.
>
> Another option is to defer setting the capacity to the point where we  
> have made sure sgx_drv_init() and sgx_cgroup_init() cannot fail.
>

Yes agree we need do this.
> Btw, I plan to review the rest from late of this week or next week  
> because this week I have some other staff needs to be finished first.
>

Sure. Thanks
Haitao