Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/3] x86/vdso: Modify __vdso_sgx_enter_enclave() to allow parameter passing on untrusted stack

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

 



On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 12:53:17PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 09:21:32PM -0700, Cedric Xing wrote:
> > -#ifdef SGX_KERNEL_DOC
> 
> Why is this removed?
> 
> > + * int __vdso_sgx_enter_enclave(int leaf, void *tcs,
> > + *				struct sgx_enclave_exinfo *exinfo,
> > + *				sgx_callback callback)
> > + * {
> > + *	while (leaf == EENTER || leaf == ERESUME) {
> > + *		int rc;
> > + *		try {
> > + *			ENCLU[leaf];
> > + *			rc = 0;
> > + *			if (exinfo)
> > + *				exinfo->leaf = EEXIT;
> > + *		} catch (exception) {
> > + *			rc = -EFAULT;
> > + *			if (exinfo)
> > + *				*exinfo = exception;
> > + *		}
> > + *
> > + *		leaf = !callback ? rc: (*callback)(rdi, rsi, rdx, exinfo,
> > + *						   r8, r9, tcs, ursp);
> > + *	}
> > + *
> > + *	return leaf > 0 ? -EINVAL : leaf;
> > + * }
> >   */
> 
> What is this? C++ and anyway there is already a source code. No need
> to duplicate with pseudo-code. Only adds maintenance burde. Please get
> rid of this.

Adding C pseudo-code was my idea, e.g. it already exists in v20.  Declaring
a psuedo-C function coerces kernel-doc into generating documentation for
the asm routine.  IIRC, fully defining the function is not required for
docs, but IMO it's significantly easier to gain an understanding of a blob
of asm if there is higher level pseudocode.



[Index of Archives]     [AMD Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux