[PAL/Linux-SGX] Rename sgx_entry to sgx_do_host_ocall
#1969
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion, not enough approvals from maintainers (2 more required), not enough approvals from different teams (1 more required, approved so far: Intel) (waiting on @dimakuv)
pal/src/host/linux-sgx/host_entry.S line 4 at r1 (raw file):
# # - Host-to-enclave normal-context flow (ECALL) -- sgx_ecall() function. There are three ECALLs # currently: ECALL_ENCLAVE_START, ECALL_THREAD_START and ECALL_THREAD_RESET.
I don't see a point of duplicating the ECALL list here, it's easy to get outdated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions, not enough approvals from maintainers (2 more required), not enough approvals from different teams (1 more required, approved so far: Intel) (waiting on @dimakuv)
pal/src/host/linux-sgx/host_entry.S line 27 at r1 (raw file):
.cfi_startproc # put entry address in RDX
-> exit target?
Code quote:
entry address
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewable status: 1 of 2 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions, not enough approvals from maintainers (2 more required), not enough approvals from different teams (1 more required, approved so far: Intel), "fixup! " found in commit messages' one-liners (waiting on @kailun-qin and @mkow)
pal/src/host/linux-sgx/host_entry.S line 4 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, mkow (Michał Kowalczyk) wrote…
I don't see a point of duplicating the ECALL list here, it's easy to get outdated.
Done.
pal/src/host/linux-sgx/host_entry.S line 27 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, kailun-qin (Kailun Qin) wrote…
-> exit target?
Done.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion, not enough approvals from maintainers (1 more required), not enough approvals from different teams (1 more required, approved so far: Intel), "fixup! " found in commit messages' one-liners (waiting on @mkow)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, all discussions resolved, "fixup! " found in commit messages' one-liners
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion, not enough approvals from maintainers (1 more required), not enough approvals from different teams (1 more required, approved so far: Intel), "fixup! " found in commit messages' one-liners (waiting on @dimakuv)
pal/src/host/linux-sgx/host_entry.S line 27 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, dimakuv (Dmitrii Kuvaiskii) wrote…
Done.
Isn't this ECALL exit target? Or OCALL entry?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewable status: 1 of 2 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion, not enough approvals from maintainers (2 more required), not enough approvals from different teams (1 more required, approved so far: Intel), "fixup! " found in commit messages' one-liners (waiting on @kailun-qin and @mkow)
pal/src/host/linux-sgx/host_entry.S line 27 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, mkow (Michał Kowalczyk) wrote…
Isn't this ECALL exit target? Or OCALL entry?
Done.
That's not an ECALL exit target -- our ECALLs do not return (except for a special ECALL_THREAD_RESET, but it's a different story).
So here I'm talking about the OCALL-entry rip, i.e. where the enclave code will jump out of the enclave to perform an OCALL.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r3, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion, not enough approvals from maintainers (2 more required), not enough approvals from different teams (1 more required, approved so far: Intel), "fixup! " found in commit messages' one-liners (waiting on @mkow)
pal/src/host/linux-sgx/host_entry.S line 27 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, dimakuv (Dmitrii Kuvaiskii) wrote…
Done.
That's not an ECALL exit target -- our ECALLs do not return (except for a special
ECALL_THREAD_RESET, but it's a different story).So here I'm talking about the OCALL-entry rip, i.e. where the enclave code will jump out of the enclave to perform an OCALL.
Yeah, but isn't the term "exit target" for EEXIT? We mentioned similar things in multiple other places IIRC. Alternatively, what about keeping the original _entry suffix in the label, then the original comment would look fine?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewable status: 1 of 2 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion, not enough approvals from maintainers (2 more required), not enough approvals from different teams (1 more required, approved so far: Intel), "fixup! " found in commit messages' one-liners (waiting on @kailun-qin and @mkow)
pal/src/host/linux-sgx/host_entry.S line 27 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, kailun-qin (Kailun Qin) wrote…
Yeah, but isn't the term "exit target" for EEXIT? We mentioned similar things in multiple other places IIRC. Alternatively, what about keeping the original
_entrysuffix in the label, then the original comment would look fine?
Done. Well, I removed the word "entry" :) Is this a compromise for everyone?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r4, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion, not enough approvals from maintainers (1 more required), not enough approvals from different teams (1 more required, approved so far: Intel), "fixup! " found in commit messages' one-liners (waiting on @mkow)
pal/src/host/linux-sgx/host_entry.S line 27 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, dimakuv (Dmitrii Kuvaiskii) wrote…
Done. Well, I removed the word "entry" :) Is this a compromise for everyone?
Thanks :) LGTM
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r4, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, all discussions resolved, "fixup! " found in commit messages' one-liners
pal/src/host/linux-sgx/host_entry.S line 27 at r1 (raw file):
That's not an ECALL exit target -- our ECALLs do not return (except for a special
ECALL_THREAD_RESET, but it's a different story).
It kinda is? Doing an OCALL is just a return from the ECALL.
|
Jenkins, retest Jenkins-SGX-20.04-apps please (network connectivity issue) |
The file `host_entry.S` contains low-level code that executes ECALL/OCALL/AEX flows in the untrusted runtime of Gramine. Previously, this file contained the label `sgx_entry` that has a misleading name -- it doesn't "enter the SGX enclave" but instead it "performs an OCALL on the host", i.e. executes the syscall on the host. This commit renames this label to avoid confusion. Also, some explanations are added. Signed-off-by: Dmitrii Kuvaiskii <dmitrii.kuvaiskii@intel.com>
dimakuv
force-pushed
the
dimakuv/rename-host-entry-funcs
branch
from
3e3bda5
to
4a73025
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed all commit messages.
Reviewable status:complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed all commit messages.
Reviewable status:
Description of the changes
The file
host_entry.Scontains low-level code that executes ECALL/OCALL/AEX flows in the untrusted runtime of Gramine. Previously, this file contained the labelsgx_entrythat has a misleading name -- it doesn't "enter the SGX enclave" but instead it "performs an OCALL on the host", i.e. executes the syscall on the host. This commit renames this label to avoid confusion. Also, some explanations are added.Requested by @mkow while reviewing #1857.
How to test this PR?
No functional changes.
This change is