On Fri, 2021-10-29 at 10:00 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 10/29/21 5:18 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > +What: /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/sgx/size > > +Date: October 2021 > > +Contact: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx> > > I don't think we should do something *entirely* SGX-specific here. The > only question to me is whether any non-SGX users want something like > this and who they are. > > Here are some ideas I like more than an "sgx/" directory: > > /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/arch/sgx_size > /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/x86/sgx_size > /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/coco/sgx_size Sure, I can rename the attribute group as "x86". > There's somebody else *today* who is trying to do something in the same > general area: per-node platform-specific memory encryption capabilities: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211027195511.207552-6-martin.fernandez@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Martin's is adding a new attribute as part of pre-existing attribute group for node device, where as my patch is adding a completely new named attribute group. > Also, could we please think through how this will look if we add more > attributes? I can imagine wanting both: > > * total SGX memory available > * total SGX memory present > > But those would be quite hard to differentiate if we have just an > "sgx_size". > > Wouldn't it be much nicer to name them things like: > > sgx_present_bytes > sgx_available_bytes > > ? > > In other words, can we please try to think just a bit into the future on > this one? What other SGX things will we want to export like this? > Outside of SGX, who else wants stuff _like_ this? I don't mind renaming the attribute but maybe it should sgx_total_bytes, just because in some other sysfs attributes that keyword is used to refer all of the bytes? /Jarkko
