On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 01:08:33AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:

+static int sgx_validate_secs(const struct sgx_secs *secs,
+			     unsigned long ssaframesize)
+{
+	if (secs->size < (2 * PAGE_SIZE) || !is_power_of_2(secs->size))
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	if (secs->base & (secs->size - 1))
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	if (secs->miscselect & sgx_misc_reserved_mask ||
+	    secs->attributes & sgx_attributes_reserved_mask ||
+	    secs->xfrm & sgx_xfrm_reserved_mask)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	if (secs->attributes & SGX_ATTR_MODE64BIT) {
+		if (secs->size > sgx_encl_size_max_64)
+			return -EINVAL;
+	} else if (secs->size > sgx_encl_size_max_32)
+		return -EINVAL;

These should be >=, not >, the SDM uses one of those fancy ≥ ligatures.

Internal versions use more obvious pseudocode, e.g.:

    if ((DS:TMP_SECS.ATTRIBUTES.MODE64BIT = 1) AND
        (DS:TMP_SECS.SIZE AND (~((1 << CPUID.18.0:EDX[15:8]) – 1)))
    {
        #GP(0);
    }

+
+	if (!(secs->xfrm & XFEATURE_MASK_FP) ||
+	    !(secs->xfrm & XFEATURE_MASK_SSE) ||
+	    (((secs->xfrm >> XFEATURE_BNDREGS) & 1) !=
+	     ((secs->xfrm >> XFEATURE_BNDCSR) & 1)))
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	if (!secs->ssa_frame_size || ssaframesize > secs->ssa_frame_size)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	if (memchr_inv(secs->reserved1, 0, sizeof(secs->reserved1)) ||
+	    memchr_inv(secs->reserved2, 0, sizeof(secs->reserved2)) ||
+	    memchr_inv(secs->reserved3, 0, sizeof(secs->reserved3)) ||
+	    memchr_inv(secs->reserved4, 0, sizeof(secs->reserved4)))
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	return 0;
+}