From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 15:50:23 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] KVM: arm64: Cap KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS by KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS
Message-Id: <ebfa56a6-d444-e82e-bf0d-946765c7f8ae@redhat.com>
List-Id: <kvm-ppc.vger.kernel.org>
References: <20211111162746.100598-1-vkuznets@redhat.com>
 <20211111162746.100598-2-vkuznets@redhat.com>
 <a5cdff6878b7157587e92ebe4d5af362@kernel.org> <875ysxg0s1.fsf@redhat.com>
 <87k0hd8obo.wl-maz@kernel.org>
 <ad3534bc-fe3a-55f5-b022-4dbec5f29798@redhat.com> <87y25onsj6.fsf@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <87y25onsj6.fsf@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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

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).