From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
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 092EE7002C
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 11:27:25 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 00DE98551
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 11:27:25 +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 id 85401853B
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 11:27:24 +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 5271A46798
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 11:27:24 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <1522a367-35fe-e7ba-a03b-9881d24c1dd7@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 11:27:13 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:90.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/90.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=c3=bcnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
Cc: Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
References: <20210624072920.43336-1-w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
 <1624521156.jnauh4rg8d.astroid@nora.none>
 <9da93aae-c870-2b31-c13d-1e633f0e3354@proxmox.com>
 <1624526230.jg5pbz96o8.astroid@nora.none>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <1624526230.jg5pbz96o8.astroid@nora.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.634 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           -0.001 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 storage] btrfs: check for btrfs in
 on_add_hook and activate
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 09:27:25 -0000

On 24.06.21 11:23, Fabian Gr=C3=BCnbichler wrote:
> On June 24, 2021 11:10 am, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
>> On 24.06.21 09:56, Fabian Gr=C3=BCnbichler wrote:
>>> On June 24, 2021 9:29 am, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote:
>>>>  sub activate_storage {
>>>>      my ($class, $storeid, $scfg, $cache) =3D @_;
>>>> +    assert_btrfs($scfg->{path});
>>>>      return PVE::Storage::DirPlugin::activate_storage($class, $store=
id, $scfg, $cache);
>>> shouldn't this be the other way round? first check for things like=20
>>> is_mountpoint, then whether btrfs is there.. makes for less confusing=
=20
>>> error message at least..
>>>
>>
>> But then we create already the sub-directories in DirPlugin's SUPER->a=
ctivate_storage call
>> to the base plugin one and leave that stuff over when the assert fails=
?
>>
>=20
> true. but OTOH, we do support dir storages where $path does not exist=20
> yet before the first activation..
>=20
> maybe
>=20
> if is_mountpoint check that mountpoint // path with DirPlugin::path_is_=
mounted && btrfs
>=20
> then call activate_storage from dir plugin
>=20
> then check $path is btrfs
>=20
> most setups should have is_mountpoint set (except maybe / on btrfs with=
=20
> no separate "data" filesystem..), so this should handle most of it. if =

> we pull in the mkdir $path handling into the BTRFSPlugin, then=20
> everything would be handled (and only the subdir creation is delegate t=
o=20
> the DirPlugin..)
>=20

I just duplicated the DirPlugin activate storage, could be factored out m=
aybe but
for now I prefer it as is, using actual plugin methods from other plugins=
 feels
always a bit weird and risky, as on the use-site one is seldom aware of t=
hat when
changing things there, risking breakage - so in the longer term I'd like =
that the
more generic stuff moves to a "static" helper module, not having a export=
-base.