On Thu, 2024-04-04 at 20:24 -0500, Haitao Huang wrote:
> > Again, IMHO having CONFIG_CGROUP_SGX_EPC here is ugly, because it
> > doesn't even
> > match the try_charge() above, which doesn't have the
> > CONFIG_CGROUP_SGX_EPC.
> >
> > If you add a wrapper in "epc_cgroup.h"
> >
> Agree. but in
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 07:53:45 -0500, Huang, Kai wrote:
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/epc_cgroup.c
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+// Copyright(c) 2022 Intel Corporation.
It's 2024 now.
And looks you need to use C style comment for /* Copyright ... */, af
On Mon Apr 1, 2024 at 12:29 PM EEST, Huang, Kai wrote:
> On Sat, 2024-03-30 at 13:17 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Thu Mar 28, 2024 at 2:53 PM EET, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > >
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/epc_cgroup.c
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
> > > > +// SPDX-Lice
On Sat, 2024-03-30 at 13:17 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu Mar 28, 2024 at 2:53 PM EET, Huang, Kai wrote:
> >
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/epc_cgroup.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > > +// Copyright(c) 2022 Intel Corporation
On Thu Mar 28, 2024 at 2:53 PM EET, Huang, Kai wrote:
>
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/epc_cgroup.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > +// Copyright(c) 2022 Intel Corporation.
>
> It's 2024 now.
>
> And looks you need to use C style comment for /*
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/epc_cgroup.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +// Copyright(c) 2022 Intel Corporation.
It's 2024 now.
And looks you need to use C style comment for /* Copyright ... */, after looking
at some other C files.
> +
> +#includ
6 matches
Mail list logo
