[PATCH v3 6/6] s390/mm: Remove sev_active() function

Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-18T03:30:02Z

All references to sev_active() were moved to arch/x86 so we don't need to
define it for s390 anymore.

Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
---
arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h | 1 -
arch/s390/mm/init.c | 8 +-------
2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
index ff813a56bc30..2542cbf7e2d1 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -5,7 +5,6 @@
#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__

static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void) { return false; }
-extern bool sev_active(void);

int set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages);
int set_memory_decrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages);
diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/init.c b/arch/s390/mm/init.c
index 78c319c5ce48..6286eb3e815b 100644
--- a/arch/s390/mm/init.c
+++ b/arch/s390/mm/init.c
@@ -155,15 +155,9 @@ int set_memory_decrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages)
return 0;
}

-/* are we a protected virtualization guest? */
-bool sev_active(void)
-{
- return is_prot_virt_guest();
-}
-
bool force_dma_unencrypted(struct device *dev)
{
- return sev_active();
+ return is_prot_virt_guest();
}

/* protected virtualization */