On 10/18/2025 4:11 AM, Ackerley Tng 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 expect to
expect -> expected
user per-gmem attributes at some point), at which point enumerating support
^
use
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]>
---
include/linux/kvm_host.h | 2 +-
virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 2 ++
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
index fddb373fcbaaf..21bf30e8d3cc1 100644
--- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
+++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
@@ -721,7 +721,7 @@ static inline int kvm_arch_vcpu_memslots_id(struct kvm_vcpu
*vcpu)
}
#endif
-#ifndef CONFIG_KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES
+#ifndef kvm_arch_has_private_mem
static inline bool kvm_arch_has_private_mem(struct kvm *kvm)
{
return false;
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index f73047ea4333e..591795a3fa124 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -2428,8 +2428,10 @@ static int kvm_vm_ioctl_clear_dirty_log(struct kvm *kvm,
#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_VM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES
static u64 kvm_supported_mem_attributes(struct kvm *kvm)
{
+#ifdef kvm_arch_has_private_mem
if (!kvm || kvm_arch_has_private_mem(kvm))
return KVM_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_PRIVATE;
+#endif
return 0;
}