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 79E3A98434 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2023 09:52:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 52E401CF4 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2023 09:51:32 +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 ; Wed, 15 Nov 2023 09:51:31 +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 57F7642EEF for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2023 09:51:31 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2023 09:51:24 +0100 From: Fabian =?iso-8859-1?q?Gr=FCnbichler?= To: Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20231114140204.27679-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> <20231114140204.27679-3-f.ebner@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20231114140204.27679-3-f.ebner@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: astroid/0.16.0 (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid) Message-Id: <1700038214.ir3qk5rhnu.astroid@yuna.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.066 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, tools.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [RFC common 1/2] partially fix #4501: next unused port: bump port reservation expiretime 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: Wed, 15 Nov 2023 08:52:02 -0000 On November 14, 2023 3:02 pm, Fiona Ebner wrote: > For QEMU migration via TCP, there's a bit of time between port > reservation and usage, because currently, the port needs to be > reserved before invoking a fork, where the systemd scope needs to be > set up and swtpm might need to be started before the QEMU binary can > be invoked and actually use the port. >=20 > Not bumping too much, because mass migration with many small VMs might > need to re-use the ports rather quickly (there's only 50 ports). >=20 > The other two usages of the function are for VNC and SPICE, with > 100 and 999 ports respectively. And for those, ports are usually used > for longer than 30 seconds anyways, so the higher expire time should > be fine. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Fiona Ebner since it's an RFC: Acked-by: Fabian Gr=C3=BCnbichler > --- > src/PVE/Tools.pm | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >=20 > diff --git a/src/PVE/Tools.pm b/src/PVE/Tools.pm > index b3af2c6..4d018e9 100644 > --- a/src/PVE/Tools.pm > +++ b/src/PVE/Tools.pm > @@ -918,7 +918,7 @@ sub next_unused_port { > =20 > my $code =3D sub { > =20 > - my $expiretime =3D 5; > + my $expiretime =3D 30; > my $ctime =3D time(); > =20 > my $ports =3D {}; > --=20 > 2.39.2 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > pve-devel mailing list > pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel >=20 >=20 >=20