On Wed, 7 Apr 2021 22:10:36 +0000 Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Thu, Apr 08, 2021, Kai Huang wrote: > > + /* > > + * sgx_virt_ecreate() returns: > > + * 1) 0: ECREATE was successful > > + * 2) -EFAULT: ECREATE was run but faulted, and trapnr was set to the > > + * exception number. > > + * 3) -EINVAL: access_ok() on @secs_hva fails. It's a kernel bug and > > + * sgx_virt_ecreate() aleady gave a warning. > > Eh, I don't love "kernel bug", all we know is that access_ok() failed. It's > also not all that helpful since it doesn't guide the debugger to any particular > code that would prevent access_ok() from failing. > > What if this comment simply states the rules/expectations and lets the debugger > figure out what's wrong? E.g. > > * 3) -EINVAL: access_ok() on @secs_hva failed. This should never > * happen as KVM checks host addresses at memslot creation. > * sgx_virt_create() has already warned in this case. > > Same goes for sgx_virt_einit() in the next patch. Sure. Will update in next version. > > > + */ > > + ret = sgx_virt_ecreate(pageinfo, (void __user *)secs_hva, &trapnr); > > + if (!ret) > > + return kvm_skip_emulated_instruction(vcpu); > > + if (ret == -EFAULT) > > + return sgx_inject_fault(vcpu, secs_gva, trapnr); > > + > > + return ret; > > +}
