Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 9 Jun 2021 16:32:46 +0200 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [RFC v2-fix-v2 1/1] x86: Introduce generic protected guest abstraction |
| |
On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 07:01:13AM -0700, Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan wrote: > I am still not clear. What happens when a driver which includes > linux/protected-guest.h is compiled for non-x86 arch (s390 or arm64)?
I was wondering what felt weird: why is prot{ected,}_guest_has() in a generic linux/ namespace header and not in an asm/ one?
I think the proper way is for the other arches should be to provide their own prot_guest_has() implementation which generic code uses and the generic header would contain only the PR_GUEST_* defines.
Take ioremap() as an example:
arch/x86/include/asm/io.h arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h arch/s390/include/asm/io.h ...
and pretty much every arch has that arch-specific io.h header which defines ioremap() and generic code includes include/linux/io.h which includes the respective asm/io.h header so that users can call the respective ioremap() implementation.
prot_guest_has() sounds just the same to me.
Better?
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
| |