From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D2E71FF15E for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:06:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A018B25E20; Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:06:54 +0100 (CET) Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:06:20 +0100 Message-Id: From: "Christoph Heiss" To: "Dominik Csapak" , "Thomas Lamprecht" X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0 References: <20260120131319.949986-1-c.heiss@proxmox.com> <20260120131319.949986-5-c.heiss@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1769000724384 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.051 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 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH common 4/4] sysfs: use new PVE::RS::VFIO::Nvidia module to retrieve vGPU info 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: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Cc: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On Wed Jan 21, 2026 at 9:08 AM CET, Dominik Csapak wrote: > On 1/20/26 4:00 PM, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: >> Am 20.01.26 um 14:12 schrieb Christoph Heiss: [..] >>> +use PVE::RS::VFIO::Nvidia; >> >> we do not depend on libpve-rs-perl in libpve-common-perl, and if easily possible >> I'd strongly favor keeping it that way, Yeah, I'm not happy with that either - was also going to say (seems my patch notes got lost somewhere) that using PVE::RS::VFIO means get_mdev_types() doesn't only deal with sysfs stuff anymore - so might make sense to move the mdev stuff anyway. >> bootstrapping and handling bigger package >> bumps with newer versioned dependencies or break/depends bumps is already quite >> a bit of work as is, such stuff does not make it easier, especially if adding >> a new dependencies is not recorded in d/control's packaging definition. Right, I knew I forgot something - sorry. >> >> Can this move to some non-leaf package instead? Where are the users of this, only >> qemu-server or other too (pve-manager?)? [..] > > In summary I think simply moving the mdev/vgpu stuff to qemu-server > makes the most sense for now. A separate package for vfio/mdev/vgpu type stuff could make sense, as that code will probably grow some more. OTOH, if (most) new stuff is implemented through proxmox-ve-rs/proxmox-perl-rs in the future, having it live in qemu-server definitely makes a lot of sense too, I think. I'm open to suggestions in any case, happy to rework that as needed. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel