s390/mm: Remove sev_active() function
All references to sev_active() were moved to arch/x86 so we don't need to
define it for s390 anymore.
Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20190806044919.10622-7-bauerman@linux.ibm.com
diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
index ff813a5..2542cbf 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -5,7 +5,6 @@
#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void) { return false; }
-extern bool sev_active(void);
int set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages);
int set_memory_decrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages);
diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/init.c b/arch/s390/mm/init.c
index 20340a0..a124f19 100644
--- a/arch/s390/mm/init.c
+++ b/arch/s390/mm/init.c
@@ -156,14 +156,9 @@ int set_memory_decrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages)
}
/* are we a protected virtualization guest? */
-bool sev_active(void)
-{
- return is_prot_virt_guest();
-}
-
bool force_dma_unencrypted(struct device *dev)
{
- return sev_active();
+ return is_prot_virt_guest();
}
/* protected virtualization */
