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 661A3950CD for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 19:13:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4C9D73578C for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 19:13:05 +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 ; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 19:13:04 +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 7F79744C59 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2024 19:13:04 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: From: Alexander Zeidler To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox VE development discussion Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 19:13:03 +0200 In-Reply-To: <93fb9823-2b05-4363-8b50-f51f448dd910@proxmox.com> References: <20240322135933.164404-1-a.zeidler@proxmox.com> <20240322135933.164404-6-a.zeidler@proxmox.com> <93fb9823-2b05-4363-8b50-f51f448dd910@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.46.4-2 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.100 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 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [report.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager 6/9] report: switch `dmidecode` to quiet to omit almost never needed info 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, 11 Apr 2024 17:13:35 -0000 On Mon, 2024-03-25 at 09:20 +0100, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > On 22/03/2024 14:59, Alexander Zeidler wrote: > > like on this system: > >=20 > > # dmidecode -t bios > > # dmidecode 3.4 > > Getting SMBIOS data from sysfs. > > SMBIOS 3.0.0 present. > >=20 > > Handle 0x0000, DMI type 0, 24 bytes > >=20 > > Handle 0x005C, DMI type 13, 22 bytes >=20 >=20 > The manual page here states that this option also hides other entries: >=20 > > Unknown, inactive and OEM-specific entries are not displayed. Meta-data= and handle references are hidden. >=20 > So especially on newer HW this might contain some actual info beyond > the SMBIOS version/metadata that gets hidden. >=20 > I mean, I have no hard feelings here, but I'm wondering if it's really > worth hiding that info if it can include potential relevant stuff. Sounds reasonable, thank you! Will drop this patch. >=20 > >=20 > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Zeidler > > --- > > PVE/Report.pm | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >=20 > > diff --git a/PVE/Report.pm b/PVE/Report.pm > > index 505629c7..3a81bdb2 100644 > > --- a/PVE/Report.pm > > +++ b/PVE/Report.pm > > @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ my $init_report_cmds =3D sub { > > hardware =3D> { > > order =3D> 70, > > cmds =3D> [ > > - 'dmidecode -t bios', > > + 'dmidecode -t bios -q', > > 'lscpu', > > 'lspci -nnk', > > ], >=20