> On Dec 7, 2018, at 10:44 AM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 12/7/18 10:15 AM, Jethro Beekman wrote: >> This is not sufficient to support the Fortanix SGX ABI calling >> convention, which was designed to be mostly compatible with the SysV >> 64-bit calling convention. The following registers need to be passed in >> to an enclave from userspace: RDI, RSI, RDX, R8, R9, R10. The following >> registers need to be passed out from an enclave to userspace: RDI, RSI, >> RDX, R8, R9. > > Are you asking nicely to change the new Linux ABI to be consistent with > your existing ABI? Or, are you saying that the new ABI *must* be > compatible with this previous out-of-tree implementation? I think that allowing the enclave to return at least a few registers is quite reasonable, but I don’t have a strong opinion.
