| Message ID | 20210924125359.2587041-2-tabba@google.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Reduce scope of vcpu state at hyp by refactoring out state hyp needs | expand |
Hey Fuad, On Friday 24 Sep 2021 at 13:53:30 (+0100), Fuad Tabba wrote: > Add a function to check whether a VM is protected (under pKVM). > Since the creation of protected VMs isn't enabled yet, this is a > placeholder that always returns false. The intention is for this > to become a check for protected VMs in the future (see Will's RFC). > > No functional change intended. > > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> > Signed-off-by: Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20210603183347.1695-1-will@kernel.org/ > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > index 7cd7d5c8c4bc..adb21a7f0891 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > @@ -763,6 +763,11 @@ void kvm_arch_free_vm(struct kvm *kvm); > > int kvm_arm_setup_stage2(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long type); > > +static inline bool kvm_vm_is_protected(struct kvm *kvm) > +{ > + return false; > +} Nit: this isn't used before patch 25 I think, so maybe move to a later point in the series? That confused me a tiny bit :) Thanks, Quentin
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h index 7cd7d5c8c4bc..adb21a7f0891 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h @@ -763,6 +763,11 @@ void kvm_arch_free_vm(struct kvm *kvm); int kvm_arm_setup_stage2(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long type); +static inline bool kvm_vm_is_protected(struct kvm *kvm) +{ + return false; +} + int kvm_arm_vcpu_finalize(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int feature); bool kvm_arm_vcpu_is_finalized(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);