From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <s.ivanov@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 4E4CEC4BF
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue,  3 May 2022 13:39:47 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 403E0E80
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue,  3 May 2022 13:39:17 +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 C2F3EE75
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue,  3 May 2022 13:39:16 +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 979E34310D
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue,  3 May 2022 13:39:16 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 3 May 2022 13:39:15 +0200
From: Stoiko Ivanov <s.ivanov@proxmox.com>
To: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
Cc: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <20220503133915.3eb8d77a@rosa.proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220503110847.2396527-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
References: <20220503110847.2396527-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.203 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
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
 http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
 information. [diskmanage.pm]
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH storage] Diskmanage: check for extended
 partitions
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: Tue, 03 May 2022 11:39:47 -0000

On Tue,  3 May 2022 13:08:47 +0200
Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com> wrote:

> those would not get assinged a usage and thus appear in the list
> when we want to select a partition (e.g. for creating a zpool)
> 
> since we cannot do anything with such a  partition, return the usage
> 'Extended Partition' for these.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
> ---
>  PVE/Diskmanage.pm | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/PVE/Diskmanage.pm b/PVE/Diskmanage.pm
> index d67cc6b..f693d00 100644
> --- a/PVE/Diskmanage.pm
> +++ b/PVE/Diskmanage.pm
> @@ -647,6 +647,8 @@ sub get_disks {
>  		    if $parttype eq 'c12a7328-f81f-11d2-ba4b-00a0c93ec93b';
>  		return 'ZFS reserved'
>  		    if $parttype eq '6a945a3b-1dd2-11b2-99a6-080020736631';
> +		return 'Extended Partition'
> +		    if $parttype eq '0x5';
This looks like a MBR partitiontype (both the length and the concept of
extended partition seem MBR-related) - Do we want to support MBR disks?
(we do not in the installer and when initializing a new disk)
Any pointer to where this could be needed?

Really meant as an expression of my confusion - am fine if we want to
support this and the patch LGTM.

> ..snip..