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 649096A1DB for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 08:54:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5649F20DCC for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 08:54:52 +0200 (CEST) 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 id 3E33E20DB8 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 08:54:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0585B448CE for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 08:54:51 +0200 (CEST) From: Dominik Csapak To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 08:54:50 +0200 Message-Id: <20210916065450.87803-2-d.csapak@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.30.2 In-Reply-To: <20210916065450.87803-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> References: <20210916065450.87803-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.388 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% 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 Subject: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager 2/2] ui: form/ControllerSelector: set correct max value for the device-id 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: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 06:54:52 -0000 the 'diskControllerMaxIDs' object in Utils does not describe the 'maximum ids', but the maximum *number* of ids, so the max is one less correctly set that instead the api rejected those values (e.g. ide4) already, so its only a ui change Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak --- noticed while working on the multi disk wizard panel www/manager6/form/ControllerSelector.js | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/www/manager6/form/ControllerSelector.js b/www/manager6/form/ControllerSelector.js index daca2432..27c06169 100644 --- a/www/manager6/form/ControllerSelector.js +++ b/www/manager6/form/ControllerSelector.js @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ Ext.define('PVE.form.ControllerSelector', { return; } let field = me.down('field[name=deviceid]'); - field.setMaxValue(PVE.Utils.diskControllerMaxIDs[value]); + field.setMaxValue(PVE.Utils.diskControllerMaxIDs[value] - 1); field.validate(); }, }, @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ Ext.define('PVE.form.ControllerSelector', { xtype: 'proxmoxintegerfield', name: 'deviceid', minValue: 0, - maxValue: PVE.Utils.diskControllerMaxIDs.ide, + maxValue: PVE.Utils.diskControllerMaxIDs.ide - 1, value: '0', flex: 1, allowBlank: false, -- 2.30.2