On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 11:47:32AM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> If it's made static then the sme_active()/sev_active() inline functions
> would need to be turned into functions within the mem_encrypt.c file. So
> there's a trade-off to do that, which is the better one?
Simple: why do we have funct
On 7/25/2017 11:28 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 02:07:43PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
From: Tom Lendacky
Provide support for Secure Encyrpted Virtualization (SEV). This initial
Your subject misses a verb and patch subjects should have an active verb
denoting what the p
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 02:07:43PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
> From: Tom Lendacky
>
> Provide support for Secure Encyrpted Virtualization (SEV). This initial
Your subject misses a verb and patch subjects should have an active verb
denoting what the patch does. The sentence above is a good exam
From: Tom Lendacky
Provide support for Secure Encyrpted Virtualization (SEV). This initial
support defines a flag that is used by the kernel to determine if it is
running with SEV active.
Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky
Signed-off-by: Brijesh Singh
---
arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h | 2 ++
a