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 58C0778421 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 16:19:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4F49E1E53B for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 16:19:24 +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 8E5B61E52D for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 16:19:23 +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 696924646A for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 16:19:23 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <468bae39-cfe4-88c2-18e6-eb1cb2d305d1@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 16:19:22 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:89.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/89.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com> References: <20210308134338.31391-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20210308134338.31391-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.005 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address 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 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [drive.pm, proxmox.com] Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [RFC PATCH qemu-server] fix bootdisk_size for new bootorder config scheme 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, 29 Apr 2021 14:19:54 -0000 On 08.03.21 14:43, Dominik Csapak wrote: > Previously, we ever only had a single boot *disk*, while possibly > having multiple cdroms/nics in the boot order > > e.g. the config: > > boot: dnc > bootdisk: scsi0 > ide0: media=cdrom,none > scsi0: xxx > net0: ... > > would return the size of scsi0 even though it would first boot > from cdrom/network. > > When editing the bootorder with such a legacy config, we > remove the 'bootdisk' property and replace the legacy notation > with an explicit order, but we only search the first disk > for the size now. > > Restore that behaviour by iterating over all disks in the boot > order property string until we get one that is not a cdrom > and has a size. > > Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com> > --- > i cannot remember if that change was deliberate, but at least one > user ran into that: > > https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/possible-bug-boot-disk-size-shows-as-0b.85454/ > > PVE/QemuServer/Drive.pm | 24 +++++++++++------------- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > applied, thanks!