Both Intel and AMD now implement it, so there is no need to check if the
callback is implemented.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index 59958ce2b681..0492baeb78ab 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -7699,7 +7699,7 @@ static int inject_pending_event(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
* from L2 to L1 due to pending L1 events which require exit
* from L2 to L1.
*/
- if (is_guest_mode(vcpu) && kvm_x86_ops.check_nested_events) {
+ if (is_guest_mode(vcpu)) {
r = kvm_x86_ops.check_nested_events(vcpu);
if (r != 0)
return r;
@@ -7761,7 +7761,7 @@ static int inject_pending_event(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
* proposal and current concerns. Perhaps we should be setting
* KVM_REQ_EVENT only on certain events and not unconditionally?
*/
- if (is_guest_mode(vcpu) && kvm_x86_ops.check_nested_events) {
+ if (is_guest_mode(vcpu)) {
r = kvm_x86_ops.check_nested_events(vcpu);
if (r != 0)
return r;
@@ -8527,7 +8527,7 @@ static inline int vcpu_block(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
static inline bool kvm_vcpu_running(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
- if (is_guest_mode(vcpu) && kvm_x86_ops.check_nested_events)
+ if (is_guest_mode(vcpu))
kvm_x86_ops.check_nested_events(vcpu);
return (vcpu->arch.mp_state == KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE &&
--
2.18.2
