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 4580B1FF15C for ; Fri, 14 Nov 2025 13:12:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 45B85119AB; Fri, 14 Nov 2025 13:13:32 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <298d504a-5339-44b3-99a1-6e595691a5de@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 13:12:59 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta To: Fiona Ebner , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20251111135808.110791-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> <20251111135808.110791-3-f.ebner@proxmox.com> <5ce79121-9ce3-4f6f-9842-3c9a5572b99b@proxmox.com> <426ea401-74b9-4825-94ec-45a7fd80bb2d@proxmox.com> <78741d24-3a20-487e-9d33-3146236f5e8f@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1763122353313 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.023 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 Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server 2/2] fix #6985: ovmf: auto-enroll Microsoft UEFI CA 2023 for Windows 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: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" Am 14.11.25 um 13:03 schrieb Fiona Ebner: > Am 14.11.25 um 12:47 PM schrieb Thomas Lamprecht: >> Am 14.11.25 um 12:03 schrieb Fiona Ebner: >>> Yes, we will need to be careful down the line. A clean option is using >>> different QSD IDs for different tasks (the ID for a QSD can be any >>> string and does not need to be a VMID). Currently, we only use QSD for >>> EFI enrollment here and for TPM which are both part of the same start >>> task. I will add a comment to note this and that >>> ensure_ms_2023_cert_enrolled() may currently only be called as part of >>> VM start. >> >> >> Oh, and what I just noticed: the QSD is currently not running inside of >> the qemu.slice/$vmid.scope? >> >> Not a blocker at all now, but that might be nice to have to ensure it's >> resource (mainly memory) usage is accounted for. > > The one started for enrollment is not, but that one is very short-lived. > The one for started for swtpm should actually be? It's part of the > start_swtpm() function. True, and as you say that's the more important one anyway due to running for the entire time such a VM is running. So fine as is for now, we can change this at anytime anyway. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel