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 07BE21FF140 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2026 10:32:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A6A7A37A55; Fri, 27 Mar 2026 10:32:56 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <17988b55-43bc-46af-9067-ef635365b096@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 10:32:52 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH pve-manager 4/8] ui: Add basic custom CPU model editor To: Arthur Bied-Charreton References: <20260312084021.124465-1-a.bied-charreton@proxmox.com> <20260312084021.124465-5-a.bied-charreton@proxmox.com> <3pvqrvjm7srqfaaok3o7ner4xa6s3sdqlw5thrhhxigdpvl4w5@wy5hunbsnjn7> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <3pvqrvjm7srqfaaok3o7ner4xa6s3sdqlw5thrhhxigdpvl4w5@wy5hunbsnjn7> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1774603922815 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.003 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 Message-ID-Hash: 5WUFG23HREKVHKNMGVUHSKBMDPJCMAQ7 X-Message-ID-Hash: 5WUFG23HREKVHKNMGVUHSKBMDPJCMAQ7 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 CC: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Am 27.03.26 um 10:22 AM schrieb Arthur Bied-Charreton: > On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 04:10:34PM +0100, Fiona Ebner wrote: >> Am 12.03.26 um 9:40 AM schrieb Arthur Bied-Charreton: >> > [...] >>> + { >>> + xtype: 'CPUModelSelector', >>> + fieldLabel: gettext('Reported Model'), >> >> What about 'Base Model' with a tooltip that it's reported to the guest >> (if that is even necessary)? I feel like 'Reported Model' doesn't make >> it clear that the rest of the configuration is applied based off that model. >> > I agree that "Base Model" makes more sense than "Reported Model", > however the latter is better aligned with the SectionConfig key. > > In order for pvesh to be consistent with the UI, we would need to expose > `base-model` in the `custom-cpu-models` API and translate it to > `reported-model` in the handlers. Which would however still not be > consistent with the actual config file content and might lead to confusion > for users who are/were manually editing the file. > > `reported-model` seems to be quite sticky, changing the SectionConfig > key looks like a pretty big refactor? > > What do you think? Would we be okay with the naming inconcistency, and > if so at what level should the break happen? Otherwise we could keep > "Reported Model" and add a tooltip explaining it to avoid confusion. > You don't need to change it in the backend. There's no real need for user-facing strings in the UI to be consistent with property keys in the API schema. Things may be called differently in the UI if those names are better from a user perspective.