> On Sep 25, 2020, at 12:53 PM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 9/25/20 12:43 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote: >>> That means that the intent argument (SGX_PROT_*) is currently unused. >> No, the intent argument is used (eventually) by SGX's ->mprotect() >> implementation, i.e. sgx_mprotect() enforces that the actual protections are a >> subset of the declared/intended protections. >> >> If ->mprotect() is not merged, then it yes, it will be unused. > > OK, I think I've got it. > > I think I'm OK with adding ->mprotect(). As long as folks buy into the > argument that intent needs to be checked at mmap() time, they obviously > need to be checked at mprotect() too. > > Jarkko, if you want to try and rewrite the changelog, capturing the > discussion here and reply, I think I can ack the resulting patch. I > don't know if that will satisfy the request from Boris from an ack from > a "mm person", but we can at least start there. :) I think I agree. ->mprotect seems reasonable to me. FWIW, I don’t think I should ack this particular thing — it was, to a decent extent, my suggestion in the first place, so I’m biased. I think it turned into something reasonable, and the ->mprotect mechanism seems easily supportable and plausibly useful for other purposes down the road. > > Please be judicious in what you include in the changelog. There's been > a lot of detritus in them. Let's keep it as short, sweet, simple and on > topic as we can.
