Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 23 Nov 2020 14:02:50 +0000 | From | Quentin Perret <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 09/27] KVM: arm64: Allow using kvm_nvhe_sym() in hyp code |
| |
On Monday 23 Nov 2020 at 12:57:23 (+0000), David Brazdil wrote: > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > > index 882eb383bd75..391cf6753a13 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c > > @@ -1369,7 +1369,7 @@ static void cpu_prepare_hyp_mode(int cpu) > > > > params->vector_hyp_va = kern_hyp_va((unsigned long)kvm_ksym_ref(__kvm_hyp_host_vector)); > > params->stack_hyp_va = kern_hyp_va(per_cpu(kvm_arm_hyp_stack_page, cpu) + PAGE_SIZE); > > - params->entry_hyp_va = kern_hyp_va((unsigned long)kvm_ksym_ref(__kvm_hyp_psci_cpu_entry)); > > + params->entry_hyp_va = kern_hyp_va((unsigned long)kvm_ksym_ref_nvhe(__kvm_hyp_psci_cpu_entry)); > > Why is this change needed?
You mean this line specifically or the whole __kvm_hyp_psci_cpu_entry thing?
For the latter, it is to avoid having the compiler complain about __kvm_hyp_psci_cpu_entry being re-defined as a different symbol. If there is a better way to solve this problem I'm happy to change it -- I must admit I got a little confused with the namespacing along the way.
Thanks, Quentin
| |