Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 29 May 2020 06:10:16 +0300 | From | Jarkko Sakkinen <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v12 00/18] Enable FSGSBASE instructions |
| |
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 06:07:23AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 03:41:57PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 10:19:10PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 01:40:16PM -0400, Don Porter wrote: > > > > Hi Thomas, > > > > > > > > On 5/28/20 6:29 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > > Until recently, we were doing proof-of-concept research, not product > > > > > > development, and there are limited hours in the day. I also hasten to > > > > > > say that the product of research is an article, the software artifact > > > > > > serves as documentation of the experiment. In contrast, the product of > > > > > > software development is software. It takes significant time and effort > > > > > > to convert one to the other. Upstreaming code is of little scientific > > > > > > interest. But things have changed for our project; we had no users in > > > > > > 2015 and we are now un-cutting corners that are appropriate for research > > > > > > but inappropriate for production. For a research artifact with an > > > > > > audience that knew the risks, we shipped a module because it was easier > > > > > > to maintain and install than a kernel patch. > > > > > > > > > > I understand that and with a big fat warning and documentation from > > > > > start I wouldn't have complained so vehemently. > > > > > > > > This is a fair point. We will fix this ASAP, and I will be more careful > > > > about this going forward. > > > > > > Are you going to experiment with this patch set and Graphene? Just > > > sanity checking so that I don't unnecessarily do duplicate work. > > > > > > I ignored most of the discussion since I came here only with the > > > motivation of testing Graphene together with this patch set. I'm > > > assuming that motivation is always good no matter which angle you come > > > from. Thus, I might have missed the part I'm asking. > > > > This series was heavily tested with Graphene-like workloads. > > Is there something then readily available to test such workload with SGX > enabled? Or should I go patching Graphene? Not sure what I should take > from that comment :-) > > For me the main point is that I need a tool to create arbitrary work > loads and run them inside enclave, once the SGX support reaches the > upstream. It's not just about testing this particular series. > > The reason why I've been passive with this work so far is that I've been > busy combining updating of SGX series for over two years and maintaining > work. Now is the first time when I have time for this. > > Actually I found this by searching lore.kernel.org whether anything has > happend with this. Have had a bullet in my backlog for ages.
Just need the info if anyone else is going to do something to Graphene or not in near future. If not, I will do it myself.
/Jarkko
| |