From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54534945B6 for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 10:36:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2CEC95524 for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 10:35:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 10:35:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3218C447CF for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 10:35:35 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <3d29eab1-9f42-4ade-bc1b-f49126509ef8@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 10:35:26 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Filip Schauer , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20231219094023.25726-1-f.schauer@proxmox.com> <20231219094023.25726-6-f.schauer@proxmox.com> <1d79d880-e0f6-4875-ae5b-483a62028a60@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <1d79d880-e0f6-4875-ae5b-483a62028a60@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.071 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server 4/4] cpu config: Unify the default value for 'kvm' X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 09:36:06 -0000 Am 21.02.24 um 16:39 schrieb Filip Schauer: > On 19/02/2024 15:47, Fiona Ebner wrote: >> On an x86_64 host, for guests using a different architecture (i.e. >> aarch64), hot-plugging is already broken, because we try to hotplug a >> CPU of type "$cpu-x86_64-cpu,XYZ" which won't work anyways: >> >> vcpus: hotplug problem - VM 130 qmp command 'device_add' failed - >> 'kvm64-x86_64-cpu' is not a valid device model name >> >> The actual breaking change is for the host arch being something other >> than x86_64 (which isn't officially supported) and the VM being >> x86_64, ... >> >>> @@ -414,9 +415,9 @@ sub get_custom_model { >>>     # Print a QEMU device node for a given VM configuration for >>> hotplugging CPUs >>>   sub print_cpu_device { >>> -    my ($conf, $id) = @_; >>> +    my ($conf, $arch, $id) = @_; >>>   -    my $kvm = $conf->{kvm} // 1; >>> +    my $kvm = $conf->{kvm} // is_native($arch); >>>       my $cpu = get_default_cpu_type('x86_64', $kvm); >> ...because in that case, before this patch we got kvm64 here, but with >> the patch we get qemu64 which would be a problem for live-migration. > > I expressed my opinion on this matter in the following mail: > > https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/2023-December/061131.html > Yes, I also think the change is fine. But breaking ARM64 guests on a x86_64 host would not be fine. The point is CPU hotplug already doesn't work here, so the commit message should be adapted to mention that. I saw you completely removed the commit message in v8. Should be added back with the additional information, but that alone doesn't warrant a v9, can also be done when applying.