From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DE311FF141 for ; Tue, 19 May 2026 16:50:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E7EDEB641; Tue, 19 May 2026 16:50:26 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <297a293b-beff-4f85-96f8-496d1aa634d6@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 16:50:22 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH manager/qemu-server 0/3] custom cpu models: tighten reported-model handling To: Arthur Bied-Charreton , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260519140623.594472-1-a.bied-charreton@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <20260519140623.594472-1-a.bied-charreton@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1779202208901 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.009 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 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: SBCIJD76VZHJYHOPSS2HC6D5CDPHBJQL X-Message-ID-Hash: SBCIJD76VZHJYHOPSS2HC6D5CDPHBJQL 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 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 19.05.26 um 4:06 PM schrieb Arthur Bied-Charreton: > The default reported-model for custom CPU models is kvm64, a legacy > model with a limited set of features. > > This series tightens the handling around reported-model: > > 1. Require reported-model on creation via the API, as the UI already > does > 2. Prevent deletion of reported-model via PUT > 3. Resolve and write out the default explicitly on config writes > > This will be useful in case we ever want to make reported-model > required in a future major release. Nit: the Suggested-by trailer should come before the Signed-off-by to keep the chronological order. Regarding patch 1: it is a breaking change, but the feature has only been on no-subscription for a few days and I suspect most people would use the UI or specify an explicit model anyways. Reviewed-by: Fiona Ebner Tested-by: Fiona Ebner