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 6833A90DC8 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 15:48:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 507A129770 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 15:48:03 +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)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 15:48:02 +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 0185944D0F; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 15:48:02 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2022 15:48:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/109.0 Content-Language: en-GB To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Fiona Ebner , aderumier@odiso.com References: <20221209192726.1499142-1-aderumier@odiso.com> <20221209192726.1499142-10-aderumier@odiso.com> <59724033-3e2d-dfc3-403c-c99e3954c90c@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <59724033-3e2d-dfc3-403c-c99e3954c90c@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.546 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 -1.148 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 qemu-server 09/10] tests: add virtio-mem tests 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, 19 Dec 2022 14:48:03 -0000 On 16/12/2022 14:42, Fiona Ebner wrote: > It wasn't supported on QEMU 3.0 😉 But it raises the question if we > should introduce version guards for the feature? Not sure what our > current policy is when it comes to actively-opt-in features. Especially > if it's still a technology preview. Yeah with the whole thing being opt-in it isn't that bad, can still help to encode them though, especially to guard against some dev or admin mishaps, e.g., on migration to old-er node. So IMO not a must, but quite probably the cleaner and better approach, so would only not do it if it's a big PITA to handle (shouldn't really be).