From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Reply-To: mimu@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization References: <20190426183245.37939-1-pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20190426183245.37939-5-pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20190426192711.GA31463@infradead.org> <20190429155951.3175fef5.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <3b9956a5-d8da-65fa-a2f7-4f54087d91d6@de.ibm.com> From: Michael Mueller Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 14:50:42 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3b9956a5-d8da-65fa-a2f7-4f54087d91d6@de.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Archive: List-Post: To: Christian Borntraeger , Halil Pasic , Christoph Hellwig Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Cornelia Huck , Martin Schwidefsky , Sebastian Ott , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Thomas Huth , Viktor Mihajlovski , Vasily Gorbik , Janosch Frank , Claudio Imbrenda , Farhan Ali , Eric Farman List-ID: On 29.04.19 16:05, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > > On 29.04.19 15:59, Halil Pasic wrote: >> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:27:11 -0700 >> Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 08:32:39PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote: >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_encrypted); >>> >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_decrypted); >>> >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sev_active); >>> >>> Why do you export these? I know x86 exports those as well, but >>> it shoudn't be needed there either. >>> >> >> I export these to be in line with the x86 implementation (which >> is the original and seems to be the only one at the moment). I assumed >> that 'exported or not' is kind of a part of the interface definition. >> Honestly, I did not give it too much thought. >> >> For x86 set_memory(en|de)crypted got exported by 95cf9264d5f3 "x86, drm, >> fbdev: Do not specify encrypted memory for video mappings" (Tom >> Lendacky, 2017-07-17). With CONFIG_FB_VGA16=m seems to be necessary for x84. >> >> If the consensus is don't export: I won't. I'm fine one way or the other. >> @Christian, what is your take on this? > > If we do not need it today for anything (e.g. virtio-gpu) then we can get rid > of the exports (and introduce them when necessary). I'll take them out then. >> >> Thank you very much! >> >> Regards, >> Halil >> >> >