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 C44819F944 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2023 17:29:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A437A30F2C for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2023 17:29:06 +0200 (CEST) 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 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2023 17:29:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4DA4F42CF4 for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2023 17:29:05 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <76ef5ad7-c5d4-5f49-f4c9-f583771ee4ce@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2023 17:29:03 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-GB To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Fiona Ebner References: <20230609134504.44255-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20230609134504.44255-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.082 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. [config.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH storage] api: config: add/update storage: check for type mismatch first 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: Fri, 09 Jun 2023 15:29:06 -0000 On 09/06/2023 15:45, Fiona Ebner wrote: > This avoids confusing errors about other properties when the storage > type doesn't match. By highlighting that the type doesn't match, users > should know right away what the issue is. > > Signed-off-by: Fiona Ebner > --- > src/PVE/API2/Storage/Config.pm | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/src/PVE/API2/Storage/Config.pm b/src/PVE/API2/Storage/Config.pm > index 821db21..a1ab5a7 100755 > --- a/src/PVE/API2/Storage/Config.pm > +++ b/src/PVE/API2/Storage/Config.pm > @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ sub create_or_update { > die "Storage ID '${sid}' already exists on node ${node}\n" > if !defined($scfg->{nodes}) || $scfg->{nodes}->{$node}; > > - push @$verify_params, 'type'; > + unshift $verify_params->@*, 'type'; # check for type mismatch right away > for my $key (@$verify_params) { can we do something like: for my $key ('type', $verify_params->@*) { ... a line less and a bit more straight forward IMO > if (!defined($scfg->{$key})) { > die "Option '${key}' is not configured for storage '$sid', "