From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Anup Patel <anup.patel@wdc.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] KVM: arm64: Cap KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS by KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:50:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ebfa56a6-d444-e82e-bf0d-946765c7f8ae@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y25onsj6.fsf@redhat.com>
On 11/16/21 14:23, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> (I'm about to send v2 as we have s390 sorted out.)
>
> So what do we decide about ARM?
> - Current approach (kvm->arch.max_vcpus/kvm_arm_default_max_vcpus()
> depending on 'if (kvm)') - that would be my preference.
That would be mine too.
Paolo
> - Always kvm_arm_default_max_vcpus to make the output independent on 'if
> (kvm)'.
> - keep the status quo (drop the patch).
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Anup Patel <anup.patel@wdc.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] KVM: arm64: Cap KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS by KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:50:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ebfa56a6-d444-e82e-bf0d-946765c7f8ae@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y25onsj6.fsf@redhat.com>
On 11/16/21 14:23, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> (I'm about to send v2 as we have s390 sorted out.)
>
> So what do we decide about ARM?
> - Current approach (kvm->arch.max_vcpus/kvm_arm_default_max_vcpus()
> depending on 'if (kvm)') - that would be my preference.
That would be mine too.
Paolo
> - Always kvm_arm_default_max_vcpus to make the output independent on 'if
> (kvm)'.
> - keep the status quo (drop the patch).
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Anup Patel <anup.patel@wdc.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] KVM: arm64: Cap KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS by KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 15:50:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ebfa56a6-d444-e82e-bf0d-946765c7f8ae@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y25onsj6.fsf@redhat.com>
On 11/16/21 14:23, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> (I'm about to send v2 as we have s390 sorted out.)
>
> So what do we decide about ARM?
> - Current approach (kvm->arch.max_vcpus/kvm_arm_default_max_vcpus()
> depending on 'if (kvm)') - that would be my preference.
That would be mine too.
Paolo
> - Always kvm_arm_default_max_vcpus to make the output independent on 'if
> (kvm)'.
> - keep the status quo (drop the patch).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-16 15:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-11 16:27 [PATCH 0/5] KVM: Cap KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS by KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS and re-purpose it on x86 Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` [PATCH 1/5] KVM: arm64: Cap KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS by KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 19:36 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-11-11 19:36 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-11-12 9:51 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-12 9:51 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-12 9:51 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-12 10:38 ` Andrew Jones
2021-11-12 10:38 ` Andrew Jones
2021-11-12 10:38 ` Andrew Jones
2021-11-12 10:51 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-12 10:51 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-12 10:51 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-12 14:02 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-11-12 14:02 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-11-12 14:10 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-12 14:10 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-12 14:10 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-16 13:23 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-16 13:23 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-16 13:23 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-16 15:50 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2021-11-16 15:50 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-16 15:50 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-16 15:55 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-11-16 15:55 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-11-16 15:58 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-16 15:58 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-16 15:58 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-11 16:27 ` [PATCH 2/5] KVM: MIPS: " Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` [PATCH 3/5] KVM: PPC: " Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` [PATCH 4/5] KVM: RISC-V: " Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` [PATCH 5/5] KVM: x86: Drop arbitraty KVM_SOFT_MAX_VCPUS Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:27 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-11 16:32 ` [PATCH 0/5] KVM: Cap KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS by KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS and re-purpose it on x86 Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-11 16:32 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-11 16:32 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-11-15 12:16 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-11-15 12:16 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-11-15 12:16 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-11-15 12:33 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-11-15 12:33 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-11-15 12:33 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-11-15 16:04 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-15 16:04 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-15 16:04 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-11-16 8:15 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-11-16 8:15 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-11-16 8:15 ` Christian Borntraeger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ebfa56a6-d444-e82e-bf0d-946765c7f8ae@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com \
--cc=anup.patel@wdc.com \
--cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
--cc=drjones@redhat.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=paulus@ozlabs.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.