[pve-devel] [RFC PATCH] api: network: add return schema for interface listing

[Thomas Lamprecht]

Am 06.12.24 um 09:52 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
> On 12/5/24 09:43, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
>> Am 05.12.24 um 09:27 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
>>> Most optiosn come from the api call parameter list
>>> (`json_config_properties`). The description and types for the remaining
>>> ons are either taken from the manpages, source code or similar
>>> documentation where available.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak at proxmox.com>
>>> ---
>>> sending as RFC because some descriptions are very barebones due to lack
>>> of documentation on the specific properties (link-type, vxlan-*, etc.)
>>>
>>> @s.hahnreich, maybe could you take a look at these and expand on some of
>>> them?
>>>
>>>   PVE/API2/Network.pm | 97 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>>   1 file changed, 95 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/PVE/API2/Network.pm b/PVE/API2/Network.pm
>>> index b9db9b27..df3db5af 100644
>>> --- a/PVE/API2/Network.pm
>>> +++ b/PVE/API2/Network.pm
>>> @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ my $bond_mode_enum = [
>>>       ];
>>>   
>>>   my $network_type_enum = ['bridge', 'bond', 'eth', 'alias', 'vlan',
>>> -			 'OVSBridge', 'OVSBond', 'OVSPort', 'OVSIntPort'];
>>> +			 'OVSBridge', 'OVSBond', 'OVSPort', 'OVSIntPort', 'vnet'];
>>>   
>>>   my $confdesc = {
>>>       type => {
>>> @@ -223,7 +223,100 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({
>>>   	type => "array",
>>>   	items => {
>>>   	    type => "object",
>>> -	    properties => {},
>>> +	    properties => json_config_properties({
>>> +		iface => get_standard_option('pve-iface'),
>>> +		active => {
>>> +		    type => 'boolean',
>>> +		    optional => 1,
>>> +		    description => "Set to 1 if the interface is active.",
>>
>> some rather higher level and certainly pre-existing in quite a few places, but might
>> it be better to do s/1/true/ here? IIRC the API accepts both IIRC, so not really a
>> problem if the user takes this literally,
>>
> this is the return schema only though, and we actually return a 1. Should i use
> true regardless ? (no hard feelings either way)

Nah, it probably is really fine as is then.