On Mon, 2021-09-06 at 10:35 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 03/09/21 17:58, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > Eh, it doesn't really simplify the usage. If anything it makes it more convoluted > > > because the capability check in kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension() still needs an > > > #ifdef, e.g. readers will wonder why the check is conditional but the usage is not. > > It does objectively a bit, since it's one ifdef less. > > But you're effectively replacing #ifdef CONFIG_X86_SGX_KVM with #ifdef > CONFIG_X86_SGX; so the patch is not a no-op as far as KVM is concerned. > > So NACK for the KVM parts (yeah I know it's RFC but just to be clearer), > but I agree that adding a stub inline version of the function is > standard practice and we do it a lot in KVM too. OK, this is perfectly fine for me (I care most that we can do this in SGX side). /Jarkko
