I can't activate USB 3.0 Passthrough in GUI

[gabrielpons]

Hello, first of all, sorry for my English as it is not my native language.

On my Proxmox 7.4-3 server I have a virtual machine running Windows Server 2012 R2 with the QEMU agent installed and running.

When I try to add a USB it does not let me activate the USB3 option from the GUI. On the other hand if I modify the "/etc/pve/qemu-server/100.conf" file and add ",usb3=yes" in the USB line it works but in the GUI it still does not appear activated.

Screenshot of the file "/etc/pve/qemu-server/100.conf":


Screenshot of the USB from the GUI:


Any help is greatly appreciated.

 

[Philipp Hufnagl]

would it be possible to see more of the 100.conf so I can try to reproduce it? Its ok to obscure.

 

[gabrielpons]

Of course:

 

[leesteken]

According to the Proxmox manual:

usb3=<boolean> (default = 0)
Specifies whether if given host option is a USB3 device or port. For modern guests (machine version >= 7.1 and ostype l26 and windows > 7), this flag is irrelevant (all devices are plugged into a xhci controller).

 

[gabrielpons]

Thank you very much, now I have changed "yes" to "1" and in the GUI it looks activated.

My question now is: Why can't I activate or deactivate it from the GUI?

Screenshot of the file "/etc/pve/qemu-server/100.conf":


Screenshot of the USB from the GUI:

 

[Philipp Hufnagl]

Thank you very much, now I have changed "yes" to "1" and in the GUI it looks activated.

My question now is: Why can't I activate or deactivate it from the GUI?

Screenshot of the file "/etc/pve/qemu-server/100.conf":
View attachment 52964

Screenshot of the USB from the GUI:
View attachment 52965

You can not change it in the GUI because it is irrelevant. USB3 is enabled either way

 

[gabrielpons]

You can not change it in the GUI because it is irrelevant. USB3 is enabled either way

Correct, but it is useful to be able to modify it from the GUI if the user does not have access via SSH to the server to be able to modify the file.

 

[Philipp Hufnagl]

Why would you want to modify a inconsequential setting? Allowing this would only give the user the misleading assumption they change something relevant.

 

[gabrielpons]

It was simply to see if it was a bug or not.

Thank you all for your help

 

[R_9]

Why would you want to modify a inconsequential setting? Allowing this would only give the user the misleading assumption they change something relevant.

Why would Proxmox include a setting that "does nothing" if it truly does nothing? Is this a remnant of some old setting that was planned to be implemented and never was? Im just trying to understand its purpose if it has not been removed from the menus.