Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 31 Aug 2022 11:35:10 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/6] x86/sgx: Do not consider unsanitized pages an error | From | Dave Hansen <> |
| |
Jarkko, Kai and Haitao,
Can you three please start trimming your replies? You don't need to and should not quote the entirety of your messages every time you reply.
On 8/31/22 11:28, jarkko@kernel.org wrote: >> Will it cause racing if we expose dev nodes to user space before >> ksgxd is started and sensitization done? > I'll to explain this. > > So the point is to fix the issue at hand, and fix it locally. > > Changing initialization order is simply out of context. It's > not really an argument for or against changing it > > We are fixing sanitization here, and only that with zero > side-effects to any other semantics. > > It's dictated by the development process [*] but more > importantly it's also just plain common sense.
Kai, I think your suggestion is reasonable. You make a good point about not needing ksgxd for vepc.
*But*, I think it's a bit too much for a bugfix that's headed to -stable. I'm concerned that it will have unintended side effects, *especially* when there's a working, tested alternative.
| |