Hi Dmitrii,
Thank you so much for finding as well as fixing this issue.
On 4/30/2024 7:37 AM, Dmitrii Kuvaiskii wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 04:04:24PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>> On Mon Apr 29, 2024 at 1:43 PM EEST, Dmitrii Kuvaiskii wrote:
>>> Two enclave threads may try to access the
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 04:04:24PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon Apr 29, 2024 at 1:43 PM EEST, Dmitrii Kuvaiskii wrote:
> > Two enclave threads may try to access the same non-present enclave page
> > simultaneously (e.g., if the SGX runtime supports lazy allocation). The
> > threads will
On Mon Apr 29, 2024 at 4:22 PM EEST, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon Apr 29, 2024 at 4:04 PM EEST, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > Fix these two bugs (1) by returning VM_FAULT_NOPAGE to the generic Linux
> > > fault handler so that no signal is sent to userspace, and (2) by
> > > replacing
On Mon Apr 29, 2024 at 4:04 PM EEST, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > Fix these two bugs (1) by returning VM_FAULT_NOPAGE to the generic Linux
> > fault handler so that no signal is sent to userspace, and (2) by
> > replacing sgx_encl_free_epc_page() with sgx_free_epc_page() so that no
> > EREMOVE is
On Mon Apr 29, 2024 at 1:43 PM EEST, Dmitrii Kuvaiskii wrote:
> Two enclave threads may try to access the same non-present enclave page
> simultaneously (e.g., if the SGX runtime supports lazy allocation). The
> threads will end up in sgx_encl_eaug_page(), racing to acquire the
> enclave lock. The
5 matches
Mail list logo