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 B26C2A2C67 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:16:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9106634EC9 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:16:26 +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 ; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:16:25 +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 E9F1741C2E for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:16:24 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:16:23 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.12.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Dominik Csapak References: <20230619141307.119430-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <20230619141307.119430-2-d.csapak@proxmox.com> From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <20230619141307.119430-2-d.csapak@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.005 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 NICE_REPLY_A -0.102 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 manager 2/4] ui: pci map edit: reintroduce warnings checks 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: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 12:16:56 -0000 Am 19.06.23 um 16:13 schrieb Dominik Csapak: > diff --git a/www/manager6/window/PCIMapEdit.js b/www/manager6/window/PCIMapEdit.js > index 516678e0..cd2dbfbe 100644 > --- a/www/manager6/window/PCIMapEdit.js > +++ b/www/manager6/window/PCIMapEdit.js > @@ -70,6 +70,44 @@ Ext.define('PVE.window.PCIMapEditWindow', { > me.lookup('iommu_warning').setVisible( > records.every((val) => val.data.iommugroup === -1), > ); > + > + let value = me.lookup('pciselector').getValue(); > + me.checkIsolated(value); > + }, > + > + checkIsolated: function(value) { > + let me = this; > + > + let isIsolated = function(entry) { > + let isolated = true; > + let parsed = PVE.Parser.parsePropertyString(entry); > + parsed.iommugroup = parseInt(parsed.iommugroup, 10); Nit: is there a simpler way to get the selected elements directly from the store instead of going via getValue() above and then do the parsing here? > + if (!parsed.iommugroup) { > + return isolated; > + } > + me.lookup('pciselector').getStore().each(({ data }) => { Nit: Feel a bit out of place to do the lookup here every time. Maybe pass this in the store data as an argument to the function already? > + let isSubDevice = data.id.startsWith(parsed.path); > + if (data.iommugroup === parsed.iommugroup && data.id !== parsed.path && !isSubDevice) { > + isolated = false; > + return false; > + } > + return true; > + }); > + return isolated; > + }; > + > + let showWarning = false; > + if (Ext.isArray(value)) { > + for (const entry of value) { > + if (!isIsolated(entry)) { > + showWarning = true; > + break; > + } > + } > + } else { > + showWarning = isIsolated(value); > + } > + me.lookup('group_warning').setVisible(showWarning); > }, > Not in this patch, but the warning is > The selected Device is not in a seperate IOMMU group, make sure this is intended. which has two typos: s/Device/device/ s/seperate/separate/ and I'd use s/The/A/ because multiple ones can be selected. And the warnings could/should use gettext().