Re: [PATCH 01/11] mm: Introduce a function to check for virtualization protection features

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 05:26:04PM -0500, Tom Lendacky via iommu wrote:
> In prep for other protected virtualization technologies, introduce a
> generic helper function, prot_guest_has(), that can be used to check
> for specific protection attributes, like memory encryption. This is
> intended to eliminate having to add multiple technology-specific checks
> to the code (e.g. if (sev_active() || tdx_active())).

So common checks obviously make sense, but I really hate the stupid
multiplexer.  Having one well-documented helper per feature is much
easier to follow.

> +#define PATTR_MEM_ENCRYPT		0	/* Encrypted memory */
> +#define PATTR_HOST_MEM_ENCRYPT		1	/* Host encrypted memory */
> +#define PATTR_GUEST_MEM_ENCRYPT		2	/* Guest encrypted memory */
> +#define PATTR_GUEST_PROT_STATE		3	/* Guest encrypted state */

The kerneldoc comments on these individual helpers will give you plenty
of space to properly document what they indicate and what a (potential)
caller should do based on them.  Something the above comments completely
fail to.



[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux