From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F21DE1FF0F5
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Mon, 02 Nov 2026 23:52:45 +0100 (CET)
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0121E217BB;
	Mon, 02 Nov 2026 23:52:38 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com,
	Hannes Laimer <h.laimer@proxmox.com>
Subject: applied: [PATCH pve-network] sdn: dhcp: only regenerate if no cfg is
 undef
Date: Mon,  2 Nov 2026 23:51:54 +0100
Message-ID: <179365989918.2007812.12335264849053919825.b4-ty@b4>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3
In-Reply-To: <20260831130647.1016625-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com>
References: <20260831130647.1016625-1-h.laimer@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: 1793659954433
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
	AWL                     0.352 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: 6RPHRO7ZX6PNS35S25IVN6M6DV74SD7C
X-Message-ID-Hash: 6RPHRO7ZX6PNS35S25IVN6M6DV74SD7C
X-MailFrom: t.lamprecht@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 <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:pve-devel-owner@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:pve-devel-join@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pve-devel-leave@lists.proxmox.com>

On Mon, 31 Aug 2026 15:06:47 +0200, Hannes Laimer wrote:
> Except for when there is no `.running-config` at all, these three can't
> really be `undef`, and that is what this guard should check.
> 
> These three can either all be `undef`, or none. So this does not change
> behaviour, but should be a little clearer.
> 
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[1/1] sdn: dhcp: only regenerate if no cfg is undef
      commit: 8ac5adfa0b492346fa11aa6a7c5cfb4bc8a31161