On 8/25/22 11:27, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 07:07:44AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: >> On 8/25/22 01:08, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >>> However, if the SGX subsystem initialization is retracted, the sanitization >>> process could end up in the middle, and sgx_dirty_page_list be left >>> non-empty for legit reasons. >> What does "retraction" mean in this context? > Rest of the initialization failing or features not detected (-ENODEV). Can you please work on communicating better descriptions of the problems? This really isn't good enough. I think you're talking about sgx_init(). It launches ksgxd from sgx_page_reclaimer_init() which sets about sanitizing the 'dirty_page_list'. After launching ksgxd, if later actions in sgx_init() (misc_register(), sgx_drv_init(), sgx_vepc_init()) fail, ksgxd will be stopped prematurely. This will leave pages in 'sgx_dirty_page_list' after __sgx_sanitize_pages() has completed, which results in a WARN_ON(). The WARN_ON() is really only valid when __sgx_sanitize_pages() runs to completion *and* fails to empty 'sgx_dirty_page_list'. Is that it? If so, could you please give the changelog another go?
