On Mon, 01 Mar 2021 05:43:06 -0600, Kai Huang [off-list ref] wrote:

On Mon, 2021-03-01 at 12:32 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 12:28:27AM +1300, Kai Huang wrote:

quoted

I think some script can utilize /proc/cpuinfo. For instance, admin  

can have

quoted

automation tool/script to deploy enclave (with sgx2) apps, and that  

script can check

quoted

whether platform supports sgx2 or not, before it can deploy those  

enclave apps. Or

quoted

enclave author may just want to check /proc/cpuinfo to know whether  

the machine can

quoted

be used for testing sgx2 enclave or not.

This doesn't sound like a concrete use of this. So you can hide it
initially with "" until you guys have a use case. Exposing it later is
always easy vs exposing it now and then not being able to change it
anymore.

Hi Haitao, Jarkko,

Do you have more concrete use case of needing "sgx2" in /proc/cpuinfo?

I don't have specific use cases so far. But I think users would expect all  
sub-features supported by the cpu in /proc/cpuinfo. And it is a more  
convenient and readily available tool than cpuid for verifying sgx2  
enabled in HW. So it'd be just nice for cpuinfo to be consistent with  
cpuid output.

Thanks
Haitao