Generally, it doesn't make sense to return the recommended maximum number of vCPUs which exceeds the maximum possible number of vCPUs. Note: ARM64 is special as the value returned by KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS differs depending on whether it is a system-wide ioctl or a per-VM one. Previously, KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS didn't have this difference and it seems preferable to keep the status quo. Cap KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS by kvm_arm_default_max_vcpus() which is what gets returned by system-wide KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS. Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx> --- arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c | 9 ++++++++- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c index 7838e9fb693e..0690c76def5d 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c @@ -223,7 +223,14 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long ext) r = 1; break; case KVM_CAP_NR_VCPUS: - r = num_online_cpus(); + /* + * ARM64 treats KVM_CAP_NR_CPUS differently from all other + * architectures, as it does not always bound it to + * num_online_cpus(). It should not matter much because this + * is just an advisory value. + */ + r = min_t(unsigned int, num_online_cpus(), + kvm_arm_default_max_vcpus()); break; case KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPUS: case KVM_CAP_MAX_VCPU_ID: -- 2.33.1
