On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:13:09AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 08:37:16PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 06:28:16AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:59:17PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 10:07:18PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > > * sgx_grab_page() - Grab a free EPC page > > > > > * @owner: the owner of the EPC page > > > > > * @reclaim: reclaim pages if necessary > > > > > * > > > > > * Iterate through EPC sections and borrow a free EPC page to the caller. When a > > > > > * page is no longer needed it must be released with sgx_free_page(). If > > > > > * @reclaim is set to true, directly reclaim pages when we are out of pages. No > > > > > * mm's can be locked when @reclaim is set to true. > > > > > * > > > > > * Finally, wake up ksgxswapd when the number of pages goes below the watermark > > > > > * before returning back to the caller. > > > > > * > > > > > * Return: > > > > > * an EPC page, > > > > > * -errno on error > > > > > */ > > > > > > > > > > I also rewrote the kdoc. > > > > > > > > > > I do agree that sgx_try_grab_page() should be renamed as __sgx_grab_page(). > > > > > > > > FWIW, I really, really dislike "grab". The nomenclature for normal memory > > > > and pages uses "alloc" when taking a page off a free list, and "grab" when > > > > elevating the refcount. I don't understand the motivation for diverging > > > > from that. SGX is weird enough as is, using names that don't align with > > > > exist norms will only serve to further obfuscate the code. > > > > > > OK, what would be a better name then? The semantics are not standard > > > memory allocation semantics in the first place. And kdoc in v30 speaks > > > about grabbing. > > > > In what way are they not standard allocation semantics? sgx_alloc_page() > > is an API to allocate (EPC) memory on-demand, sgx_free_page() is its partner > > to free that memory when it is no longer needed. There are many different > > ways to manage and allocate memory, but the basic premise is the same for > > all and no different than what we're doing. > > I end up to (ignoring unchanged names): > > - __sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_section() (static) > - __sgx_alloc_epc_page() > - sgx_alloc_epc_page() > - sgx_setup_epc_section() OK, also sgx_free_epc_page (not sgx_free_page() as before). /Jarkko
