From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 14:22:59 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/11] x86/sev: Add an x86 version of prot_guest_has() Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "kexec" Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Tom Lendacky Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen , Tianyu Lan , Peter Zijlstra , Dave Hansen , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Andy Lutomirski , Brijesh Singh , Thomas Gleixner On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 05:26:05PM -0500, Tom Lendacky via iommu wrote: > Introduce an x86 version of the prot_guest_has() function. This will be > used in the more generic x86 code to replace vendor specific calls like > sev_active(), etc. > > While the name suggests this is intended mainly for guests, it will > also be used for host memory encryption checks in place of sme_active(). > > The amd_prot_guest_has() function does not use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL for the > same reasons previously stated when changing sme_active(), sev_active and None of that applies here as none of the callers get pulled into random macros. The only case of that is sme_me_mask through sme_mask, but that's not something this series replaces as far as I can tell. _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec