| Message ID | 20190718032858.28744-3-bauerman@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Remove x86-specific code from generic headers | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| snowpatch_ozlabs/apply_patch | warning | Failed to apply on branch next (f5c20693d8edcd665f1159dc941b9e7f87c17647) |
| snowpatch_ozlabs/apply_patch | fail | Failed to apply to any branch |
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:28:54AM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > sme_active() is an x86-specific function so it's better not to call it from > generic code. > > There's no need to mention which memory encryption feature is active, so > just use a more generic message. Besides, other architectures will have > different names for similar technology. > > Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com> Looks good, Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
On 7/17/19 10:28 PM, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > sme_active() is an x86-specific function so it's better not to call it from > generic code. > > There's no need to mention which memory encryption feature is active, so > just use a more generic message. Besides, other architectures will have > different names for similar technology. > > Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> > --- > kernel/dma/swiotlb.c | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c > index 62fa5a82a065..e52401f94e91 100644 > --- a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c > +++ b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c > @@ -459,8 +459,7 @@ phys_addr_t swiotlb_tbl_map_single(struct device *hwdev, > panic("Can not allocate SWIOTLB buffer earlier and can't now provide you with the DMA bounce buffer"); > > if (mem_encrypt_active()) > - pr_warn_once("%s is active and system is using DMA bounce buffers\n", > - sme_active() ? "SME" : "SEV"); > + pr_warn_once("Memory encryption is active and system is using DMA bounce buffers\n"); > > mask = dma_get_seg_boundary(hwdev); > >
diff --git a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c index 62fa5a82a065..e52401f94e91 100644 --- a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c +++ b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c @@ -459,8 +459,7 @@ phys_addr_t swiotlb_tbl_map_single(struct device *hwdev, panic("Can not allocate SWIOTLB buffer earlier and can't now provide you with the DMA bounce buffer"); if (mem_encrypt_active()) - pr_warn_once("%s is active and system is using DMA bounce buffers\n", - sme_active() ? "SME" : "SEV"); + pr_warn_once("Memory encryption is active and system is using DMA bounce buffers\n"); mask = dma_get_seg_boundary(hwdev);
sme_active() is an x86-specific function so it's better not to call it from generic code. There's no need to mention which memory encryption feature is active, so just use a more generic message. Besides, other architectures will have different names for similar technology. Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com> --- kernel/dma/swiotlb.c | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)