On 7/29/26 02:35, Ackerley Tng via B4 Relay wrote: > From: Sean Christopherson <[email protected]> > > Explicitly guard reporting support for KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_PRIVATE based > on kvm_arch_has_private_mem being #defined in anticipation of decoupling > kvm_supported_mem_attributes() from CONFIG_KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES. > guest_memfd support for memory attributes will be unconditional to avoid > yet more macros (all architectures that support guest_memfd are expected to > use per-gmem attributes at some point), at which point enumerating support > KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_PRIVATE based solely on memory attributes being > supported _somewhere_ would result in KVM over-reporting support on arm64. > > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <[email protected]> > Reviewed-by: Fuad Tabba <[email protected]> > Reviewed-by: Binbin Wu <[email protected]> > Tested-by: Shivank Garg <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Ackerley Tng <[email protected]> > ---
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <[email protected]> -- Cheers, David
