On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 02:02:50PM +0000, 'Quentin Perret' via kernel-team wrote: > On Monday 23 Nov 2020 at 12:57:23 (+0000), David Brazdil wrote: > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > > > index 882eb383bd75..391cf6753a13 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > > > @@ -1369,7 +1369,7 @@ static void cpu_prepare_hyp_mode(int cpu) > > > > > > params->vector_hyp_va = kern_hyp_va((unsigned > > > long)kvm_ksym_ref(__kvm_hyp_host_vector)); > > > params->stack_hyp_va = kern_hyp_va(per_cpu(kvm_arm_hyp_stack_page, cpu) > > > + PAGE_SIZE); > > > - params->entry_hyp_va = kern_hyp_va((unsigned > > > long)kvm_ksym_ref(__kvm_hyp_psci_cpu_entry)); > > > + params->entry_hyp_va = kern_hyp_va((unsigned > > > long)kvm_ksym_ref_nvhe(__kvm_hyp_psci_cpu_entry)); > > > > Why is this change needed? > > You mean this line specifically or the whole __kvm_hyp_psci_cpu_entry > thing? > > For the latter, it is to avoid having the compiler complain about > __kvm_hyp_psci_cpu_entry being re-defined as a different symbol. If > there is a better way to solve this problem I'm happy to change it -- I > must admit I got a little confused with the namespacing along the way.
Yeah, we do need a more robust approach. It's getting out of control. > > Thanks, > Quentin > > -- > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to kernel-team+unsubscr...@android.com. >
