From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68B021FF0E1 for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2026 16:43:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3B5EC21419; Mon, 13 Jul 2026 16:43:31 +0200 (CEST) From: =?UTF-8?q?Fabian=20Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Maximiliano Sandoval Subject: applied: [PATCH qemu-server] api: create: check VM.PowerMgmt on the pool too Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2026 16:42:45 +0200 Message-ID: <178395373442.294242.6049871258530811391.b4-ty@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20260611142427.495288-1-m.sandoval@proxmox.com> References: <20260611142427.495288-1-m.sandoval@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: 1783953761199 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.293 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_LOW -0.7 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, low 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: O2PW3XN2ERUPY3EHO7RIGYEKGOHKCA4X X-Message-ID-Hash: O2PW3XN2ERUPY3EHO7RIGYEKGOHKCA4X X-MailFrom: f.gruenbichler@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 Thu, 11 Jun 2026 16:24:25 +0200, Maximiliano Sandoval wrote: > If a VM is part of a resource pool, it is possible to start it with the > permission either in /pool or in /vm. > > The upfront check done when creating a VM with --start=1 is extended > accordingly to look for the permission on the resource pool if > appropriate. > > [...] Applied, thanks! [1/1] api: create: check VM.PowerMgmt on the pool too commit: 3f6e4cd345a8700f519cb046f1db3101c2d9d9bf Best regards, -- Fabian Grünbichler