From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEEB5C433FE for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 16:04:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABB9A61AD1 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 16:04:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236612AbhKOQHL (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2021 11:07:11 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:31655 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231674AbhKOQHK (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2021 11:07:10 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1636992252; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=kNZ2k+Bbqs2mU+HEeYXnMycgNMTgeh9stKyx+F+r/jk=; b=MA8PFkhEMozot1pMpcMbQMRbhdLbNmE1Up1nSpDsuVJgo+jms07b9LrSYhbZ77sZwt+3Wj ZH4ZP/JsANWxPMEABGWuknxT7DjTWerHWRFoiQR1HBUQ11vJmLzuuZ59Gzo43DpS64JHtW +C7Zk9s/U16y/ZP+IISAvBlNW59ogSg= Received: from mail-wm1-f72.google.com (mail-wm1-f72.google.com [209.85.128.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-500-n62ZDU3BMy63bcVjdzQYBA-1; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 11:04:08 -0500 X-MC-Unique: n62ZDU3BMy63bcVjdzQYBA-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f72.google.com with SMTP id g11-20020a1c200b000000b003320d092d08so6340671wmg.9 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 08:04:08 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kNZ2k+Bbqs2mU+HEeYXnMycgNMTgeh9stKyx+F+r/jk=; b=ovfD0bgMawW/21dl1xsfVzdKNbm9EIcNYlUWzto0q4a/sUIEHIFOwFH2ZBRVQdtGzs 9jcdUYeaORtbozo4DnRWk3DAGiOupdOrA4HZ+wCmQs2MSSAAZG2qjKl/id4mbYa5JGq8 NM3YkRar3owW2WPY9pgwXyVDe5ix/tizVR/wmgNRjefH3vdJaLS9x2I439bMGqYvkxNh m6ZzhumXPJk4xQu/VSQyXYDK5cxRIN/u5a7G38WuJ1l6DTRV8jiWeVCW6lTldK6WB7pN /ZLDoWclq9JPJgrWAX9LN/eRfE8gfHZPPcn+DRHgc/vHa4qXnzqqeWBqU10BA1Xaljxi 68Jw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5332pc6tdb02l+2rFegnsa4gEzkLwpsq1mT6GX1HgtiQlL883Y35 xQJaIX/cUQEhGdcjF01i39G9QGULzZDyibkKFudBvmEO5/PrWrD+UuD9TuPHcWTFbckI020gBHl q6K88Wy/N9o41 X-Received: by 2002:a1c:cc09:: with SMTP id h9mr45662401wmb.191.1636992245606; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 08:04:05 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwz1gqovDpiBG7rQwvXN0J5DRj1u8GplrLX76hoeAAMPE/ExRbSHuZD82FzagUh/Q8svxu6iw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:cc09:: with SMTP id h9mr45662049wmb.191.1636992243301; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 08:04:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from fedora (g-server-2.ign.cz. [91.219.240.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h27sm22065673wmc.43.2021.11.15.08.04.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 15 Nov 2021 08:04:02 -0800 (PST) From: Vitaly Kuznetsov To: Christian Borntraeger , Paolo Bonzini , kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: Sean Christopherson , Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Eduardo Habkost , Marc Zyngier , Andrew Jones , Huacai Chen , Aleksandar Markovic , Anup Patel , Paul Mackerras , Michael Ellerman , 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 0/5] KVM: Cap KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS by KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS and re-purpose it on x86 In-Reply-To: References: <20211111162746.100598-1-vkuznets@redhat.com> <4a3c7be7-12fa-6e47-64eb-02e6c5be5dbc@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 17:04:01 +0100 Message-ID: <877dd9pfri.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org Christian Borntraeger writes: > Am 11.11.21 um 17:32 schrieb Paolo Bonzini: >> On 11/11/21 17:27, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >>> This is a comtinuation of "KVM: x86: Drop arbitraty KVM_SOFT_MAX_VCPUS" >>> (https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20211111134733.86601-1-vkuznets@redhat.com= /) >>> work. >>> >>> 1) Enforce KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS <=3D KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS rule on all >>> =C2=A0 architectures. [Sean Christopherson] >>> 2) Make KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS return num_online_cpus() and not an arbitrary >>> =C2=A0 value of '710' on x86. >>> >>> Everything but x86 was only 'eyeball tested', the change is trivial >>> but sorry in advance if I screwed up) >>=20 >> Christian, can you look at this for s390?=C2=A0 Returning a fixed value = seems wrong for KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS. > > If we talk about recommended number, then num_online_cpus() also seems to= make sense on s390 so > if you change that for s390 as well I can ACK this. Thanks! For KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS s390 code returns one of the three things: KVM_S390_BSCA_CPU_SLOTS(64), KVM_MAX_VCPUS(255) or KVM_S390_ESCA_CPU_SLOTS(248). For KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS, would it be better to return raw num_online_cpus(): diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c index 6a6dd5e1daf6..fcecbb762a1a 100644 --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c @@ -578,6 +578,8 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long = ext) r =3D MEM_OP_MAX_SIZE; break; case KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS: + r =3D num_online_cpus(); + break; case KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS: case KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID: r =3D KVM_S390_BSCA_CPU_SLOTS; or cap KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS value with num_online_cpus(), e.g. diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c index 6a6dd5e1daf6..1cfe36f6432e 100644 --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c @@ -585,6 +585,8 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long = ext) r =3D KVM_MAX_VCPUS; else if (sclp.has_esca && sclp.has_64bscao) r =3D KVM_S390_ESCA_CPU_SLOTS; + if (ext =3D=3D KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS) + r =3D min_t(unsigned int, num_online_cpus(), r); break; case KVM_CAP_S390_COW: r =3D MACHINE_HAS_ESOP; For reference, see our ARM discussion: https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20211111162746.100598-2-vkuznets@redhat.com/ though 390's situation is different, the returned value for KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS is not VM-dependent. --=20 Vitaly