On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:57:18AM +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote: > Hi, > > On 1/20/21 4:05 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021, Tianjia Zhang wrote: > > > In function sgx_encl_create(), the logic of directly assigning > > > value to attributes_mask determines that the call to > > > SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_PROVISION must be after the command of > > > SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_CREATE. If change this assignment statement to > > > or operation, the PROVISION command can be executed earlier and > > > more flexibly. > > > > > > Reported-by: Jia Zhang <[email protected]> > > > Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c > > > b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c > > > index f45957c05f69..0ca3fc238bc2 100644 > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c > > > @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ static int sgx_encl_create(struct sgx_encl *encl, > > > struct sgx_secs *secs) > > > encl->base = secs->base; > > > encl->size = secs->size; > > > encl->attributes = secs->attributes; > > > - encl->attributes_mask = SGX_ATTR_DEBUG | SGX_ATTR_MODE64BIT | > > > SGX_ATTR_KSS; > > > + encl->attributes_mask |= SGX_ATTR_DEBUG | SGX_ATTR_MODE64BIT | > > > SGX_ATTR_KSS; > > > > Alternatively, move the existing code to sgx_open()? Initializing the field > > when the encl object is allocated feels more correct. > > > > > This seems like a good idea. Thanks for your suggestion. I have sent v2 > patch, include the next two patches.
Did you ask from Sean about suggested-by's? Now it looks like that doing these patches were originally proposed by Sean. /Jarkko
