On Wed, 02 Jun 2021 02:33:52 +0100, Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 8:38 AM Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 27 May 2021 16:05:12 +0100, > > Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Replace places that contain logic like this: > > > is_hyp_mode_available() && !is_kernel_in_hyp_mode() > > > > > > With a dedicated boolean function is_hyp_callable(). This will be needed > > > later in kexec in order to sooner switch back to EL2. > > > > This looks like the very definition of "run in nVHE mode", so I'd > > rather you call it like this, rather than "callable", which is > > extremely ambiguous (if running at EL2, I call it any time I want, for > > free). > > Hi Marc, > > Naming is hard. News flash! > Are you proposing s/is_hyp_callable/run_in_nvhe_mode/ ? This is also > not a very good name because it does not sound like a boolean, but > instead that we know that there is nvhe mode available and we can > switch to it. No, what I suggest is "is_hyp_nvhe()", or something along those lines. It clearly identifies that we are in control of EL2, and which mode it is in. M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
