Re: [PATCH 0/3] KVM: arm64: Handle CCSIDR associativity mismatches

[Oliver Upton]

On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 11:14:43PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Dec 2022 18:29:51 +0000,
> Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Could we extend your suggestion about accepting different topologies to
> > effectively tolerate _any_ topology provided by userspace? KVM can
> > default to the virtual topology, but a well-informed userspace could
> > still provide different values to its guest. No point in trying to
> > babyproofing the UAPI further, IMO.
> 
> I think this is *exactly* what I suggested. Any valid topology should
> be able to be restored, as we currently present the VM with any
> topology the host HW may have. This must be preserved.

Ah, I was narrowly reading into the conversation as it relates to the M2
implementation, my bad. SGTM :)

--
Thanks,
Oliver