From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51F9B1FF129 for ; Thu, 06 Aug 2026 16:26:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 992BA2157B; Thu, 06 Aug 2026 16:26:37 +0200 (CEST) From: Fiona Ebner To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Arthur Bied-Charreton Subject: applied: [PATCH qemu-server v2] fix #7705: blockdev: detach backing chain on disk move/hot-unplug Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 16:23:08 +0200 Message-ID: <178602618491.178016.4045535869763004231.b4-ty@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20260617121330.347174-1-a.bied-charreton@proxmox.com> References: <20260617121330.347174-1-a.bied-charreton@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1786026375087 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.141 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW -0.7 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, low trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: V2S4VSGFIFJX24L37RJ7YISL6EUZXVER X-Message-ID-Hash: V2S4VSGFIFJX24L37RJ7YISL6EUZXVER X-MailFrom: f.ebner@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, 17 Jun 2026 14:12:13 +0200, Arthur Bied-Charreton wrote: > When snapshots-as-volume-chains is enabled, moving or hot-unplugging a > disk that holds snapshots does not detach the snapshot volumes. > `Blockdev::detach` is called in both paths and only follows the `file` > child, so the snapshot nodes are left behind. Since they were added > explicitly via blockdev-add, they are also not GCed by QEMU and, as a > result, keep their source volumes open. > > [...] Applied, thanks! I reformulated the code comment, mainly to replace 'chain node' with 'node in a chain' and because the original line was 101 characters. And a small nit: could've been one patch introducing the new option and a second one actually making use of it, but it's also fine like this. [1/1] fix #7705: blockdev: detach backing chain on disk move/hot-unplug commit: cfc229a5ea4d246adce9374ab6db8e0ada06920f