[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8f88d4700b5f84c6fb92a0fa1dff6314@www.loen.fr>
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 13:22:16 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>
Cc: Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>, <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
<kvm@...r.kernel.org>, <catalin.marinas@....com>,
<will.deacon@....com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<pbonzini@...hat.com>, <kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm: kvm: clamp NR_VCPUS to MAX_VCPUS
On 2013-09-14 13:14, Alexander Graf wrote:
> Am 14.09.2013 um 07:10 schrieb Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>:
>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/kvm/arm.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
>> index 741f66a2edbd7..9ebf8ac3a12ff 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
>> @@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ int kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension(long ext)
>> r = 1;
>> break;
>> case KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS:
>> - r = num_online_cpus();
>> + r = min(num_online_cpus(), KVM_MAX_VCPUS);
>
> Is there any real reason to prohibit overcommit?
I don't think this affects overcommit. This is the "recommended" limit,
and you can still go up to KVM_MAX_CPUS.
M.
--
Fast, cheap, reliable. Pick two.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists