Re: [PATCH v2 07/18] nitro_enclaves: Init misc device providing the ioctl interface

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 22/05/2020 10:07, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 09:29:35AM +0300, Andra Paraschiv wrote:
+static char *ne_cpus;
+module_param(ne_cpus, charp, 0644);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(ne_cpus, "<cpu-list> - CPU pool used for Nitro Enclaves");
This is not the 1990's, don't use module parameters if you can help it.
Why is this needed, and where is it documented?

This is a CPU pool that can be set by the root user and that includes CPUs set aside to be used for the enclave(s) setup; these CPUs are offlined. From this CPU pool, the kernel logic chooses the CPUs that are set for the created enclave(s).

The cpu-list format is matching the same that is documented here:

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.html

I've also thought of having a sysfs entry for the setup of this enclave CPU pool.


+/* CPU pool used for Nitro Enclaves. */
+struct ne_cpu_pool {
+	/* Available CPUs in the pool. */
+	cpumask_var_t avail;
+	struct mutex mutex;
+};
+
+static struct ne_cpu_pool ne_cpu_pool;
+
+static int ne_open(struct inode *node, struct file *file)
+{
+	return 0;
+}
If open does nothing, just don't even provide it.

I removed this and other file ops occurrences that do nothing for now.


+
+static long ne_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
+{
+	switch (cmd) {
+
+	default:
+		return -ENOTTY;
+	}
+
+	return 0;
+}
Same for ioctl.

This logic is completed in the next patch in the series.


+
+static int ne_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
+{
+	return 0;
+}
Same for release.

Done, I removed it for now.


+
+static const struct file_operations ne_fops = {
+	.owner		= THIS_MODULE,
+	.llseek		= noop_llseek,
+	.unlocked_ioctl	= ne_ioctl,
+	.open		= ne_open,
+	.release	= ne_release,
+};
+
+struct miscdevice ne_miscdevice = {
+	.minor	= MISC_DYNAMIC_MINOR,
+	.name	= NE_DEV_NAME,
+	.fops	= &ne_fops,
+	.mode	= 0660,
+};
+
+static int __init ne_init(void)
+{
+	unsigned int cpu = 0;
+	unsigned int cpu_sibling = 0;
+	int rc = -EINVAL;
+
+	memset(&ne_cpu_pool, 0, sizeof(ne_cpu_pool));
Why did you just set a structure to 0 that was already initialized by
the system to 0?  Are you sure about this?

True, this is not needed. Removed the memset() call.


+
+	if (!zalloc_cpumask_var(&ne_cpu_pool.avail, GFP_KERNEL))
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	mutex_init(&ne_cpu_pool.mutex);
+
+	rc = cpulist_parse(ne_cpus, ne_cpu_pool.avail);
+	if (rc < 0) {
+		pr_err_ratelimited(NE "Error in cpulist parse [rc=%d]\n", rc);
Again, drop all ratelimited stuff please.

Updated to pr_err().

Thank you.

Andra



Amazon Development Center (Romania) S.R.L. registered office: 27A Sf. Lazar Street, UBC5, floor 2, Iasi, Iasi County, 700045, Romania. Registered in Romania. Registration number J22/2621/2005.




[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux