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 A2D1961D06 for ; Thu, 10 Feb 2022 15:15:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8E8211E01E for ; Thu, 10 Feb 2022 15:14:45 +0100 (CET) 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 17C9D1E011 for ; Thu, 10 Feb 2022 15:14:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E3509456A9 for ; Thu, 10 Feb 2022 15:14:43 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <679d1c44-4559-8c7e-54a6-4134b7a2036b@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 15:14:43 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.1 Content-Language: en-US To: Oguz Bektas , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20220210112836.616619-1-o.bektas@proxmox.com> From: Aaron Lauterer In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.011 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 NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v2 manager] ui: vm network: allow to override MTU for virtio devices 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, 10 Feb 2022 14:15:15 -0000 On 2/10/22 15:08, Oguz Bektas wrote: > thanks for the test and review! > > instead of a validator function i guess we could just set minValue and > maxValue as well? (since allowBlank is set to true) > > seemed to work fine in my short testing just now :) > > diff --git a/www/manager6/qemu/NetworkEdit.js b/www/manager6/qemu/NetworkEdit.js > index 1e34ad1c..a3fa5724 100644 > --- a/www/manager6/qemu/NetworkEdit.js > +++ b/www/manager6/qemu/NetworkEdit.js > @@ -184,6 +184,8 @@ Ext.define('PVE.qemu.NetworkInputPanel', { > bind: { > disabled: '{!isVirtio}', > }, > + minValue: 1, > + maxValue: 65520, > allowBlank: true, > }, > ]; Duh of course... That does what we want and is much nicer :)