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 675509074F for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 09:03:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3ECC0C31D for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 09:03:27 +0100 (CET) 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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 09:03:26 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CE8B245174; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 09:03:25 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 09:03:11 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.0 To: "DERUMIER, Alexandre" , "pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com" , "aderumier@odiso.com" References: <20230104064303.2898194-1-aderumier@odiso.com> <20230104064303.2898194-5-aderumier@odiso.com> <82bd85df-382d-798a-df1f-8d7aae5344f7@proxmox.com> <68a795edc016a92aa23342ce6af101bd42b5890e.camel@groupe-cyllene.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <68a795edc016a92aa23342ce6af101bd42b5890e.camel@groupe-cyllene.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.043 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.09 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 Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v2 qemu-server 4/9] config: memory: add 'max' option 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: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 08:03:57 -0000 Am 27.01.23 um 16:03 schrieb DERUMIER, Alexandre: >> >>> +    # skip non hotpluggable value >>> +    if (safe_num_ne($newmem->{max}, $oldmem->{max})) { >>> +       die "skip\n"; >>> +    } >> >> Please move this to the call sites. The "die "skip""-logic should not >> cross function boundaries. >> >> > Just a note: This is exactly how it's done on nic && disk hotplug. > > for example: > vmconfig_update_disk { > ... > # skip non hotpluggable value > if (safe_string_ne($drive->{discard}, $old_drive->{discard}) || > safe_string_ne($drive->{iothread}, $old_drive->{iothread}) || > safe_string_ne($drive->{queues}, $old_drive->{queues}) || > safe_string_ne($drive->{cache}, $old_drive->{cache}) || > safe_string_ne($drive->{ssd}, $old_drive->{ssd}) || > safe_string_ne($drive->{ro}, $old_drive->{ro})) { > die "skip\n"; > } > > Well, I'm not a fan of that either. At least that is in the same module. To keep the logic inside the Memory.pm module, we could add a can_hotplug function and then in QemuServer.pm do die "skip\n" if !PVE::Memory::can_hotplug($old, $new); Like that, it's cleanly separated.