On Tue, 2023-10-03 at 00:15 -0500, Haitao Huang wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 04:41:33 -0500, Huang, Kai <kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >
> > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/encl.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/encl.c
> > > @@ -746,6 +746,7 @@ void sgx_encl_release(struct kref *ref)
> > > xa_destroy(&encl->page_array);
> > >
> > > if (!encl->secs_child_cnt && encl->secs.epc_page) {
> > > + sgx_drop_epc_page(encl->secs.epc_page);
> > > sgx_encl_free_epc_page(encl->secs.epc_page);
> > > encl->secs.epc_page = NULL;
> > > }
> >
> > The "record" of SECS/VA pages should be done together with this. I see
> > no
> > reason why the "record" and "drop" are separated into different patches.
>
> "record" of SECS/VA pages are done in this patch. Before nothing done in
> "record" for them because no tracking LRU lists for them. Now they are
> tracked.
>
>
I was talking about calling sgx_record_epc_page() for SECS/VA:
@@ -113,6 +113,9 @@ static int sgx_encl_create(struct sgx_encl *encl, struct
sgx_secs *secs)
encl->attributes = secs->attributes;
encl->attributes_mask = SGX_ATTR_UNPRIV_MASK;
+ sgx_record_epc_page(encl->secs.epc_page,
+ SGX_EPC_PAGE_UNRECLAIMABLE);
This piece of code *literally* does the record.
