Commit 5cbdaeef authored by Thiago Jung Bauermann's avatar Thiago Jung Bauermann Committed by Michael Ellerman

s390/mm: Remove sev_active() function

All references to sev_active() were moved to arch/x86 so we don't need to
define it for s390 anymore.
Signed-off-by: default avatarThiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarChristoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: default avatarHalil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarMichael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20190806044919.10622-7-bauerman@linux.ibm.com
parent ae7eb82a
......@@ -5,7 +5,6 @@
#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void) { return false; }
extern bool sev_active(void);
int set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages);
int set_memory_decrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages);
......
......@@ -156,14 +156,9 @@ int set_memory_decrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages)
}
/* are we a protected virtualization guest? */
bool sev_active(void)
{
return is_prot_virt_guest();
}
bool force_dma_unencrypted(struct device *dev)
{
return sev_active();
return is_prot_virt_guest();
}
/* protected virtualization */
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment