search for: s390_mem_encrypt_h__

Displaying 17 results from an estimated 17 matches for "s390_mem_encrypt_h__".

2019 May 08
2
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
...; diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h > b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..0898c09a888c > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h > @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +#ifndef S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ > +#define S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ > + > +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ > + > +#define sme_me_mask 0ULL This is rather ugly, but I understand why it's there > + > +static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; } > +extern bool sev_active(void); > + > +int set_memory_en...
2019 May 08
2
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
...; diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h > b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..0898c09a888c > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h > @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +#ifndef S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ > +#define S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ > + > +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ > + > +#define sme_me_mask 0ULL This is rather ugly, but I understand why it's there > + > +static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; } > +extern bool sev_active(void); > + > +int set_memory_en...
2019 Apr 26
0
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
...config SCHED_OMIT_FRAME_POINTER diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..0898c09a888c --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ +#ifndef S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ +#define S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ + +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ + +#define sme_me_mask 0ULL + +static inline bool sme_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); + +#e...
2019 Jun 06
0
[PATCH v4 1/8] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
...config SCHED_OMIT_FRAME_POINTER diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..0898c09a888c --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ +#ifndef S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ +#define S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ + +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ + +#define sme_me_mask 0ULL + +static inline bool sme_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); + +#e...
2019 Jun 12
0
[PATCH v5 1/8] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
...config SCHED_OMIT_FRAME_POINTER diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..0898c09a888c --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ +#ifndef S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ +#define S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ + +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ + +#define sme_me_mask 0ULL + +static inline bool sme_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); + +#e...
2019 May 23
0
[PATCH v2 1/8] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
...config SCHED_OMIT_FRAME_POINTER diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..0898c09a888c --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ +#ifndef S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ +#define S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ + +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ + +#define sme_me_mask 0ULL + +static inline bool sme_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); + +#e...
2019 May 29
0
[PATCH v3 1/8] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
...config SCHED_OMIT_FRAME_POINTER diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..0898c09a888c --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ +#ifndef S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ +#define S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ + +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ + +#define sme_me_mask 0ULL + +static inline bool sme_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); + +#e...
2019 May 09
0
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
...m/mem_encrypt.h > > b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..0898c09a888c > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h > > @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > > +#ifndef S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ > > +#define S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ > > + > > +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ > > + > > +#define sme_me_mask 0ULL > > This is rather ugly, but I understand why it's there > Nod. > > + > > +static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; } > >...
2019 May 09
0
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
...; diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..0898c09a888c > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h > @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +#ifndef S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ > +#define S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ > + > +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ > + > +#define sme_me_mask??? 0ULL > + > +static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; } > +extern bool sev_active(void); > + I noticed this patch always returns false for sme_active. Is it safe to assume...
2019 Apr 26
33
[PATCH 00/10] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV
2019 Apr 26
33
[PATCH 00/10] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV
2019 Jun 12
21
[PATCH v5 0/8] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV
2019 Jun 12
21
[PATCH v5 0/8] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV
2019 Jun 06
15
[PATCH v4 0/8] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV
2019 Jun 06
15
[PATCH v4 0/8] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV
2019 May 29
16
[PATCH v3 0/8] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV
2019 May 23
18
[PATCH v2 0/8] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization
Enhanced virtualization protection technology may require the use of bounce buffers for I/O. While support for this was built into the virtio core, virtio-ccw wasn't changed accordingly. Some background on technology (not part of this series) and the terminology used. * Protected Virtualization (PV): Protected Virtualization guarantees, that non-shared memory of a guest that operates in PV