On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 07:13:27PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 12/4/20 6:44 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> > The kvm_memcrypt_enabled() and kvm_memcrypt_encrypt_data() helper functions
> > don't conceptually have any connection to KVM (although it's not possible
> > in practice to use them without it).
> > 
> > They also rely on looking at the global KVMState.  But the same information
> > is available from the machine, and the only existing callers have natural
> > access to the machine state.
> > 
> > Therefore, move and rename them to helpers in securable-guest-memory.h,
> > taking an explicit machine parameter.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> > Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  accel/kvm/kvm-all.c                   | 27 --------------------
> >  accel/stubs/kvm-stub.c                | 10 --------
> >  hw/i386/pc_sysfw.c                    |  6 +++--
> >  include/exec/securable-guest-memory.h | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  include/sysemu/kvm.h                  | 17 -------------
> >  5 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
> ...
> 
> > +static inline int securable_guest_memory_encrypt(MachineState *machine,
> > +                                              uint8_t *ptr, uint64_t len)
> > +{
> > +    SecurableGuestMemory *sgm = machine->sgm;
> > +
> > +    if (sgm) {
> > +        SecurableGuestMemoryClass *sgmc = SECURABLE_GUEST_MEMORY_GET_CLASS(sgm);
> > +
> > +        if (sgmc->encrypt_data) {
> 
> Can this ever happen? Maybe use assert(sgmc->encrypt_data) instead?

It's made moot by changes in the next spin.

> 
> Otherwise:
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
> 
> > +            return sgmc->encrypt_data(sgm, ptr, len);
> > +        }
> > +    }
> > +
> > +    return 1;
> > +}
> 

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson