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 lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BAB2C83F22 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 2025 02:45:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ucEcL-0004gw-CI; Wed, 16 Jul 2025 22:45:05 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ucEcG-0004XD-BZ; Wed, 16 Jul 2025 22:45:00 -0400 Received: from mgamail.intel.com ([198.175.65.17]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ucEcE-0000px-NJ; Wed, 16 Jul 2025 22:45:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1752720298; x=1784256298; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=JG+43YE4q0pQg1zZzquBVVhadgET8E1jT/8t/kAfX2Y=; b=VHsVTrbYO0yABpS2akSIuutPjtq0z3eL2i7aRlU99INbwwMoh/EZcapJ 9RQpOe1YYwKGQQmCOLQjJOyUZ5VmogDGPd25e/5W1DpAOCyB0NeJ812un PjOMEFFsayXfkfYc0EWViW8yVLeV8hKSR2eEGa2JOeRdLgL2g5O/OxjzZ BekeiWPE8sZpbQ7FgA7DAvqvQCqnSqFZc3tJbUk8OVoDmNKfHXxVNeli2 In3HyHWvOBkvm7q03rmusQuYLOubIlk8XpHlLFvFCg5PrIIdRBTFofrAN JjRUQ/2xXXl4rOWt3ItO4sn+AFyFpldlVEmbCeSN0Oh0Y1lJoyeYIbhpP Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: E353v+uVSA+CMcO3XmSx6w== X-CSE-MsgGUID: 8w/vxxyjT5eBVyCuqkaFXQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11493"; a="54954685" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.16,317,1744095600"; d="scan'208";a="54954685" Received: from fmviesa009.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.149]) by orvoesa109.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Jul 2025 19:44:56 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: VEKx6418RLmIcjSZiQhEsA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: d0MZqC+7TLKB6cAInpcm1A== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.16,317,1744095600"; d="scan'208";a="158020076" Received: from liuzhao-optiplex-7080.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.239.160.39]) by fmviesa009.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Jul 2025 19:44:53 -0700 Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2025 11:06:24 +0800 From: Zhao Liu To: Michael Tokarev Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Daniel P =?iso-8859-1?Q?=2E_Berrang=E9?= , Igor Mammedov , Ewan Hai , Xiaoyao Li , Tao Su , Yi Lai , Dapeng Mi , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Chuang Xu , Guixiong Wei , Yipeng Yin , qemu-stable Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] i386/cpu: Fix number of addressable IDs field for CPUID.01H.EBX[23:16] Message-ID: References: <20250714080859.1960104-1-zhao1.liu@intel.com> <20250714080859.1960104-5-zhao1.liu@intel.com> <33497cb5-037b-4656-bd8d-6310c7c03e65@tls.msk.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <33497cb5-037b-4656-bd8d-6310c7c03e65@tls.msk.ru> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=198.175.65.17; envelope-from=zhao1.liu@intel.com; helo=mgamail.intel.com X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org > Hi! > > Previous incarnation of this patch were Cc'd qemu-stable@, as it were > supposed to be picked up for the stable qemu series. However, this > incarnation is not Cc'd to stable, and, most importantly, it relies > on a feature which was introduced after all released qemu versions. > Namely, vendor_cpuid_only_v2 is past v10.0.0, which is commit > 216d9bb6d7716 "i386/cpu: Add x-vendor-cpuid-only-v2 option for > compatibility". > > Should I omit this change for stable-10.0 series, or should it be > modified to work in 10.0? Hi Michael, considerring current fix is covered by compat option, it's not fit to be backported to the previous version. This issue has existed for a very long time, and the feedback received on this is currently one case and it based on a specific topology configuration, so the impact is limited. Therefore, in this patch version, I fixed it with the newly added compat option, which also avoids the controversy about the impact of migration. So I think you could omit this change for stable-10.0 series, if it's also okay with Paolo. Thanks, Zhao