On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:37:48AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > From: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxx> > > Introduce the feature bit and a primitive that checks if the feature is > set behind a static key check based on the cpus_have_const_cap check. > > Checking nested_virt_in_use() on systems without nested virt enabled > should have neglgible overhead. > > We don't yet allow userspace to actually set this feature. > > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> > --- [...] > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_nested.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_nested.h > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..8a3d121a0b42 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_nested.h > @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +#ifndef __ARM64_KVM_NESTED_H > +#define __ARM64_KVM_NESTED_H > + > +#include <linux/kvm_host.h> > + > +static inline bool nested_virt_in_use(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + return cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_HAS_NESTED_VIRT) && > + test_bit(KVM_ARM_VCPU_NESTED_VIRT, vcpu->arch.features); > +} Also, is it worth having a vcpu->arch.flags flag for this, similarly to SVE and ptrauth? [...] Cheers ---Dave