Re: [PATCH v14 09/19] x86/mm: x86/sgx: Signal SEGV_SGXERR for #PFs w/ PF_SGX

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 10/31/18 3:52 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I think EENTER in plain user code should have well defined semantics,
> and it should get regular signals with the appropriate bits set in
> the error code field in the ucontext.  But we should probably
> simultaneously offer a nicer API, and the libraries will use it
> because it’s nicer.

FWIW, if we have a signal-based version and a VDSO-based version, nobody
will use the VDSO one.

The Intel libraries are surely going to keep using the approach they've
been using for years and I doubt their owners will be tempted even by a
simpler interface to change one line of code.

If we want to do the VDSO route, I think we probably need to go
whole-hog and toss the signal-based one.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux