lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Mar]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 2/5] x86/sgx: Use sgx_free_epc_page() in sgx_reclaim_pages()
From
Date
On 3/3/21 7:03 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c
> index 52d070fb4c9a..ed99c60024dc 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c
> @@ -305,7 +305,6 @@ static void sgx_reclaim_pages(void)
> {
> struct sgx_epc_page *chunk[SGX_NR_TO_SCAN];
> struct sgx_backing backing[SGX_NR_TO_SCAN];
> - struct sgx_epc_section *section;
> struct sgx_encl_page *encl_page;
> struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page;
> pgoff_t page_index;
> @@ -378,11 +377,7 @@ static void sgx_reclaim_pages(void)
> kref_put(&encl_page->encl->refcount, sgx_encl_release);
> epc_page->flags &= ~SGX_EPC_PAGE_RECLAIMER_TRACKED;
>
> - section = &sgx_epc_sections[epc_page->section];
> - spin_lock(&section->lock);
> - list_add_tail(&epc_page->list, &section->page_list);
> - section->free_cnt++;
> - spin_unlock(&section->lock);
> + sgx_free_epc_page(epc_page);
> }
> }

In current upstream (3fb6d0e00e), sgx_free_epc_page() calls __eremove().
This code does not call __eremove(). That seems to be changing
behavior where none was intended.

Was this, perhaps, based on top of Kai's series that changes the
behavior of sgx_free_epc_page()?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-03-05 18:39    [W:0.083 / U:0.268 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site