On 1/25/23 00:16, Jim Mattson wrote:
This is a userspace ABI change that breaks existing hypervisors. Please don't do this. Userspace ABIs are supposed to be inviolate.
What exactly is broken?
Part of the definition of the API is that you can take KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID and pass it to KVM_SET_CPUID2 for all vCPUs. Returning host topology information for a random host vCPU definitely violates the contract.
Furthermore, any existing userspace should be prepared to deal with nonexistent host topology leaves. If you mean that said userspace would now pass no topology to the guest, that's not an API change either.
(Now, there are certainly other parts of the KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID contract that should be specified better. But that should be done for each leaf one by one, which I intend to do, and would not extend to these three host topology leaves).
Paolo