lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-05-29 05:11    [W:0.083 / U:4.116 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site