Messages in this thread | | | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Subject | Re: [patch 01/10] x86/fpu/signal: Clarify exception handling in restore_fpregs_from_user() | Date | Thu, 02 Sep 2021 16:08:05 +0200 |
| |
On Thu, Sep 02 2021 at 16:08, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Wed, 2021-09-01 at 16:47 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote: >> As for SGX consuming the trap number in general, it's correct. For non-KVM usage, >> it's nice to have but not strictly necessary. Any fault except #PF on ENCLS is >> guaranteed to be a kernel or hardware bug; SGX uses the trap number to WARN on a >> !#PF exception, e.g. on #GP or #UD. Not having the trap number would mean losing >> those sanity checks, which have been useful in the past. > > AFAIK, we do not consider #UD as a bug. Agree with the conclusion that SGX > should never #MC, I just did not get this part. #UD is something that is > useful for SGX run-time.
I understood that storing the trap number is useful. I was just questioning the #MC angle. I.e. pretending that the #MC caused by ENCLS is recoverable.
Thanks,
tglx
| |