Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Fri, 12 Jul 2019, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
>> diff --git a/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h b/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
>> index b310a9c18113..f2e399fb626b 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
>> @@ -21,23 +21,11 @@
>>
>> #else /* !CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_MEM_ENCRYPT */
>>
>> -#define sme_me_mask 0ULL
>> -
>> -static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; }
>> static inline bool sev_active(void) { return false; }
>
> You want to move out sev_active as well, the only relevant thing is
> mem_encrypt_active(). Everything SME/SEV is an architecture detail.
I'm sure you saw it. I addressed sev_active in a separate patch.
Thanks for reviewing this series!
>> +static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void) { return false; }
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
--
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center
