From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D729A1FF15C for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 09:16:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CD71817A10; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 09:16:04 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <26c867c9-83a9-4a23-8a1f-7cce319d9d3f@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 09:16:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com> To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20250120145203.282363-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <20250120145203.282363-4-d.csapak@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <20250120145203.282363-4-d.csapak@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.020 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 Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH guest-common v5 3/3] mapping: remove find_on_current_node X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> Cc: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com> On 1/20/25 15:51, Dominik Csapak wrote: > they only have one user each (where we can inline the implementation). > It's easy enough to recreate should we need to. > turns out i forgot that we added a second user of the pci function in pve-manager we still need to adapt the qemu-server side code still, so this would have one user after again... i could still do the changes similar to this version (remove the find_on_current_node here, add a new sub in qemu-server) but add a new patch for pve-manager that makes use of the new qemu-server sub alternatively we could omit this patch and simply change the one place in qemu-server where find_on_current_node is not enough seems variant 2 is less breakage & work, any input on this @thomas? (I'm asking you because you started to review the patches in v5) but I'll wait with a v6 until i get more feedback on this series (at least a user on the bugzilla reported that it works correct except the VFIO state in the migration log) _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel