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 272ED1FF38C for ; Fri, 31 May 2024 13:37:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0710A33F2D; Fri, 31 May 2024 13:37:41 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <696d617a-b571-4953-b3fe-b7c2f21fa074@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 13:37:06 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Dominik Csapak References: <20240419124556.3334691-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <20240419124556.3334691-2-d.csapak@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <20240419124556.3334691-2-d.csapak@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.059 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 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [pci.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH guest-common v3 1/4] mapping: pci: rework properties check 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 19.04.24 um 14:45 schrieb Dominik Csapak: > rename '$cfg' to '$mapping', 'correct' to 'expected' > reword the error messages > also check keys from the configured props not only the expected ones > Would've been nicer as multiple commits. > previously we only checked the keys from the 'correct_props' hash > but that was unintended. We now check the keys from both, but extract > the relevant properties first. > > Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak > --- > changes from v2: > * don't refactor the properties check out > * use properties from both configured and expected hashes > * extract the relevant configured properties from the mapping > instead of using all (previously we only used the expected ones > by accident) > src/PVE/Mapping/PCI.pm | 34 +++++++++++++++++++--------------- > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/PVE/Mapping/PCI.pm b/src/PVE/Mapping/PCI.pm > index 725e106..ef1bd8d 100644 > --- a/src/PVE/Mapping/PCI.pm > +++ b/src/PVE/Mapping/PCI.pm > @@ -131,9 +131,9 @@ sub options { > > # checks if the given config is valid for the current node > sub assert_valid { > - my ($name, $cfg) = @_; > + my ($name, $mapping) = @_; > > - my @paths = split(';', $cfg->{path} // ''); > + my @paths = split(';', $mapping->{path} // ''); > > my $idx = 0; > for my $path (@paths) { > @@ -148,32 +148,36 @@ sub assert_valid { > my $info = PVE::SysFSTools::pci_device_info($path, 1); > die "pci device '$path' not found\n" if !defined($info); > > - my $correct_props = { My suggestion is the following code changes. See below for rationale[0]. # make sure to initialize all keys that should be checked below! > + my $expected_props = { > id => "$info->{vendor}:$info->{device}", > iommugroup => $info->{iommugroup}, 'subsystem-id' => undef, > }; > > if (defined($info->{'subsystem_vendor'}) && defined($info->{'subsystem_device'})) { > - $correct_props->{'subsystem-id'} = "$info->{'subsystem_vendor'}:$info->{'subsystem_device'}"; > + $expected_props->{'subsystem-id'} = "$info->{'subsystem_vendor'}:$info->{'subsystem_device'}"; > } > > - for my $prop (sort keys %$correct_props) { > + my $configured_props = { $mapping->%{qw(id iommugroup subsystem-id)} }; > + > + my $merged = { %$expected_props, %$configured_props }; # just for the keys > + for my $prop (sort keys %$merged) { I'd prefer to just extract the keys directly and avoid the comment: my @keys = keys { $expected_props->%*, $configured_props->%* }->%*; [0]: But we could also just initialize $expected_props like mentioned above and then simply use the keys from there. Then you also don't need to construct a new hash for $configured_props and introduce a new hard-coded list ;) > next if $prop eq 'iommugroup' && $idx > 0; # check iommu only on the first device > > - next if !defined($correct_props->{$prop}) && !defined($cfg->{$prop}); > - die "no '$prop' for device '$path'\n" > - if defined($correct_props->{$prop}) && !defined($cfg->{$prop}); > - die "'$prop' configured but should not be\n" > - if !defined($correct_props->{$prop}) && defined($cfg->{$prop}); > + next if !defined($expected_props->{$prop}) && !defined($configured_props->{$prop}); > + die "missing expected property '$prop' for device '$path'\n" > + if defined($expected_props->{$prop}) && !defined($configured_props->{$prop}); > + die "unexpected property '$prop' configured for device '$path'\n" > + if !defined($expected_props->{$prop}) && defined($configured_props->{$prop}); > > - my $correct_prop = $correct_props->{$prop}; > - $correct_prop =~ s/0x//g; > - my $configured_prop = $cfg->{$prop}; > + my $expected_prop = $expected_props->{$prop}; > + $expected_prop =~ s/0x//g; > + my $configured_prop = $configured_props->{$prop}; > $configured_prop =~ s/0x//g; > > - die "'$prop' does not match for '$name' ($correct_prop != $configured_prop)\n" > - if $correct_prop ne $configured_prop; > + die "'$prop' does not match for '$name' ($expected_prop != $configured_prop)\n" > + if $expected_prop ne $configured_prop; > } > + > $idx++; > } > _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel