From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:46416 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726513AbfGRNBh (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Jul 2019 09:01:37 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x6ICwG9O031445 for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 09:01:35 -0400 Received: from e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.103]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2ttqxq3j9e-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 09:01:34 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 14:01:31 +0100 Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 15:01:23 +0200 From: Halil Pasic Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] s390/mm: Remove sev_active() function In-Reply-To: <20190718084456.GE24562@lst.de> References: <20190718032858.28744-1-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> <20190718032858.28744-7-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> <20190718084456.GE24562@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <20190718150123.4230a00c.pasic@linux.ibm.com> Sender: linux-s390-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Thiago Jung Bauermann , x86@kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , Marek Szyprowski , Robin Murphy , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Alexey Dobriyan , Thomas Lendacky , Mike Anderson , Ram Pai On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 10:44:56 +0200 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > -/* 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(); > > } > > Do we want to keep the comment for force_dma_unencrypted? Yes we do. With the comment transferred: Reviewed-by: Halil Pasic > > Otherwise looks good: > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig