On 04/11/2022 06:16, Usama Arif wrote:
> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke() which is called later on in the function
> will return failure if there's no conduit (or pre-SMCCC 1.1),
> hence the check is unnecessary.
>
> Suggested-by: Steven Price <steven.pr...@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Usama Arif <usama.a...@bytedance.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Price <steven.pr...@arm.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c | 4 ----
> 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c
> index 57c7c211f8c7..aa718d6a9274 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c
> @@ -141,10 +141,6 @@ static bool __init has_pv_steal_clock(void)
> {
> struct arm_smccc_res res;
>
> - /* To detect the presence of PV time support we require SMCCC 1.1+ */
> - if (arm_smccc_1_1_get_conduit() == SMCCC_CONDUIT_NONE)
> - return false;
> -
> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_ARCH_FEATURES_FUNC_ID,
> ARM_SMCCC_HV_PV_TIME_FEATURES, &res);
>
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
