From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1C711FF0B7 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2026 15:13:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id F369D215F1; Fri, 30 Oct 2026 15:13:17 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <43e751d1-c2c9-43e3-88d6-b653fae8d846@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2026 15:13:13 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta Subject: Re: [RFC proxmox-perl-rs/qemu-server/qemu-server-rs v2 0/9] pci-handling rewrite (part 1/2/3) To: Fiona Ebner , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20261015081041.743422-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <5ec6ad07-7a3b-4195-991a-73042637d8fe@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Dominik Csapak In-Reply-To: <5ec6ad07-7a3b-4195-991a-73042637d8fe@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1793369594093 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.338 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust 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: 7VQWAELYIDY2QPWZMBZLDZEJS6TYGGKP X-Message-ID-Hash: 7VQWAELYIDY2QPWZMBZLDZEJS6TYGGKP X-MailFrom: d.csapak@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: On 10/29/26 4:36 PM, Fiona Ebner wrote: > Am 15.10.26 um 10:11 AM schrieb Dominik Csapak: >> ## Phase 4 - Host and NUMA layouts (the next part) >> >> With all the pieces in place, we can then easily extend the new layout by PCI >> switches that are needed for assigning to NUMA nodes and replicating the host >> topology for passed through devices. > Can you describe the planned VM configuration settings for this? How do > they fit alongside/relate to the "pci-layout" option you introduce in > patch 9/9? It would be nice to know before the "pci-layout" option is > set in stone. i would have imagined something like: machine: q35,pci-layout=grouped,pci-topology= i'd use new device types in the grouped layout to represent the pci expanders necessary for numa nodes and switches etc, to replicate either the (reduced) host topology of the devices or simply to add them to the relevant numa node alternatively we could add new pci-layouts for these two types of topologies and having them strictly separate depends a bit on what is more practical: * another config on the perl side but having a single layout * having more layouts but only a single config option i'd send a new version of this and the topology things after that next week, i think then it's easier to see how it would look like