From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28DA81FF0AE for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2026 12:49:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1C5CE21323; Tue, 13 Oct 2026 12:49:30 +0200 (CEST) From: Fiona Ebner To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Arthur Bied-Charreton Subject: applied: [PATCH pve-qemu v2] parse-cpu-flags: stop filtering out 'pmu' Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2026 12:49:07 +0200 Message-ID: <179188854371.151722.610040579516643594.b4-ty@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20261013095241.410553-1-a.bied-charreton@proxmox.com> References: <20261013095241.410553-1-a.bied-charreton@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1791888565839 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.438 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: UHCDSCBLW7KFBZUPWOMV5UU6DMV7YVSL X-Message-ID-Hash: UHCDSCBLW7KFBZUPWOMV5UU6DMV7YVSL X-MailFrom: f.ebner@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue, 13 Oct 2026 11:49:15 +0200, Arthur Bied-Charreton wrote: > 'pmu' was excluded from the list of flags in the custom CPU flag dialog > because it is not a CPUID flag (not part of '-cpu help' output). > However, it is closely related to CPUID: it enables the virtual PMU, and > QEMU derives other CPUID bits from it. For example, PDCM is cleared when > it is disabled. It therefore makes sense to handle it like the other > flags, including the check for which nodes support it, rather than > exposing it as a separate property in the CPU config. Since it is a > plain boolean, it also fits the existing [+-] syntax. > > [...] Applied, thanks! [1/1] parse-cpu-flags: stop filtering out 'pmu' commit: eca96893ba6db97a58924d75546673b94ab84411