From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BB511FF15E
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Mon, 13 Oct 2025 09:50:30 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 897FDC102;
	Mon, 13 Oct 2025 09:50:45 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2025 09:50:42 +0200
Message-Id: <DDH13Q5VDOY9.FPSQYN5LE5XA@proxmox.com>
From: "Daniel Kral" <d.kral@proxmox.com>
To: "Proxmox VE development discussion" <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Cc: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.0
References: <20250909083539.39675-1-d.kral@proxmox.com>
 <20250909083539.39675-11-d.kral@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20250909083539.39675-11-d.kral@proxmox.com>
X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2
X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1760341806194
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.014 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
 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked. See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked. See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked. See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
 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 ha-manager v2 10/18] compile ha rules to a
 more compact representation
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>

On Tue Sep 9, 2025 at 10:33 AM CEST, Daniel Kral wrote:
> -=head3 get_node_affinity($rules, $sid, $online_node_usage)
> +=head3 get_node_affinity($node_affinity, $sid, $online_node_usage)

Just noticed that I forgot to change $online_node_usage to $online_nodes
here..

>  
>  Returns a list of two hashes representing the node affinity of C<$sid>
> -according to the node affinity rules in C<$rules> and the available nodes in
> +according to the node affinity C<$node_affinity> and the available nodes in
>  the C<$online_nodes> hash.
>  
>  The first hash is a hash set of available nodes, i.e. nodes where the
> @@ -251,31 +265,15 @@ If there are no available nodes at all, returns C<undef>.
>  
>  =cut
>  
> -sub get_node_affinity : prototype($$$) {
> -    my ($rules, $sid, $online_nodes) = @_;
> +sub get_node_affinity {
> +    my ($node_affinity, $sid, $online_nodes) = @_;
>  


_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel