[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190427061935.4876-1-hch@lst.de>
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2019 08:19:35 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: x86@...nel.org
Cc: thomas.lendacky@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] x86: Remove various memory encryption exports
None of these is used in modular code, and we should probably try to
keep it that way. They can be added back if we really get a legitimate
modular user.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
---
FYI: this was inspired by the fact the s390 copied some of the exports,
which made me wonder why they added them. I could not find any
potential users either in their patchkit nor in mainline.
arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c | 2 --
arch/x86/mm/pageattr.c | 2 --
2 files changed, 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c b/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c
index 385afa2b9e17..031e7702bd1e 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt.c
@@ -339,13 +339,11 @@ bool sme_active(void)
{
return sme_me_mask && !sev_enabled;
}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(sme_active);
bool sev_active(void)
{
return sme_me_mask && sev_enabled;
}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(sev_active);
/* Architecture __weak replacement functions */
void __init mem_encrypt_free_decrypted_mem(void)
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/pageattr.c b/arch/x86/mm/pageattr.c
index 4c570612e24e..9d83c724293a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/pageattr.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/pageattr.c
@@ -2066,13 +2066,11 @@ int set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages)
{
return __set_memory_enc_dec(addr, numpages, true);
}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_encrypted);
int set_memory_decrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages)
{
return __set_memory_enc_dec(addr, numpages, false);
}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(set_memory_decrypted);
int set_pages_uc(struct page *page, int numpages)
{
--
2.20.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists