From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <a.lauterer@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 8C369696D4 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 13:21:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7A0821366A for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 13:21:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (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 EB62B13660 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 13:21:29 +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 A0DED44948 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 13:21:29 +0200 (CEST) To: =?UTF-8?Q?Dominic_J=c3=a4ger?= <d.jaeger@proxmox.com>, Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> References: <20200825151426.17428-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> <20200831110448.GC120313@mala.proxmox.com> From: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com> Message-ID: <65aaa24a-cd81-1b9a-5ccf-2d493e87d6cd@proxmox.com> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 13:21:28 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200831110448.GC120313@mala.proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.071 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.207 Looks like a legit reply (A) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust 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 series 0/4] Add GUI for disk reassignment 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: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:21:30 -0000 Thx for the review and the problems found. On 8/31/20 1:04 PM, Dominic Jäger wrote: > I reassigned some disks and it seemed to work nice for me :) > Error messages about unavailable disks for running VMs and equal source and > target VM made sense to me, correct possible targets were displayed, multiple > storages worked. > > One thing that came to my mind: It might make sense to display what name the > reassigned disk got in the target VM in the log. > For example "Reassigned to VM 123 as Unused Disk 7 [maybe with volid]". > Because if there are multiple unused disks on the target VM it could happen > that it's not the one with the highest number? Sounds good. I will incorporate that in the other patch series that does deal with the backend. > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 05:14:22PM +0200, Aaron Lauterer wrote: >> This patch series adds the GUI to the recent patch series [0] which >> enables the reassignment of disks between VMs. >> >> For this to work, the previous patch series [0] needs to be applied and >> installed.