On Thu, Feb 04, 2021, Kai Huang wrote: > Hi Sean, > > Do you think is it reasonable to move this patch to KVM? sgx_virt_ecreate() can be > merged to handle ECREATE patch, and sgx_virt_einit() can be merged to handle EINIT > patch. W/o the context of that two patches, it doesn't makes too much sense to have > them standalone under x86 here I think. And nobody except KVM will use them. Short answer, no. To do that, nearly all of arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/encls.h would need to be exposed via asm/sgx.h. The macro insanity and fault/error code shenanigans really should be kept as private crud in SGX. That's the primary motivation for putting these in sgx/virt.c instead of KVM, my changelog just did a really poor job of explaining that.
