On 1/6/21 3:19 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote: >> If we remove SGX1 bit check in later, we can put this patch after the later >> patch. >> >> Do you have comment here? If you are OK, I'll remove SGX1 bit check in later >> patch and reorder the patch. > Hmm, I'm not sure why the SGX driver was merged without explicitly checking for > SGX1 support. I'm pretty sure we had an explicit SGX1 check in the driver path > at some point. My guess is that the SGX1 change ended up in the KVM series > through a mishandled rebase. There was one, but I think it got removed when I asked that the X86_FEATURE_SGX1/2 bits be removed. I actually even mentioned checking the CPUID leaf directly with cpuid...() in initialization. But I missed when that was never done. It's not a practical problem, but I do agree we should fix it up for 5.10 stable.
