From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.ebner@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) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BA08BB13B
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 17:19:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6399297E0
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 17:19:27 +0100 (CET)
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) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 17:19:24 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3FC2241A0D
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 17:19:24 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <6bc2caef-3b3f-468e-b75e-45a15bc5ed1a@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 17:19:23 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
References: <20240320125158.2094900-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
<20240320125158.2094900-4-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240320125158.2094900-4-d.csapak@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL -0.074 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy
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. [qemu.pm]
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server 3/3] api: include not mapped
resources for running vms in migrate preconditions
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: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 16:19:27 -0000
Am 20.03.24 um 13:51 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
> so that we can show a proper warning in the migrate dialog and check it
> in the bulk migrate precondition check
>
> the unavailable_storages and allowed_nodes should be the same as before
>
> Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
> ---
> not super happy with this partial approach, we probably should just
> always return the 'allowed_nodes' and 'not_allowed_nodes' and change
> the gui to handle the running vs not running state?
So not_allowed_nodes can already be returned in both states after this
patch. But allowed nodes still only if not running. I mean, there could
be API users that break if we'd always return allowed_nodes, but it
doesn't sound unreasonable for me to do so. Might even be an opportunity
to structure the code in a bit more straightforward manner.
>
> PVE/API2/Qemu.pm | 27 +++++++++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm b/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm
> index 8581a529..b0f155f7 100644
> --- a/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm
> +++ b/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm
> @@ -4439,7 +4439,7 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({
> not_allowed_nodes => {
> type => 'object',
> optional => 1,
> - description => "List not allowed nodes with additional informations, only passed if VM is offline"
> + description => "List not allowed nodes with additional informations",
> },
> local_disks => {
> type => 'array',
> @@ -4496,25 +4496,28 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({
>
> # if vm is not running, return target nodes where local storage/mapped devices are available
> # for offline migration
> + my $checked_nodes = {};
> + my $allowed_nodes = [];
> if (!$res->{running}) {
> - $res->{allowed_nodes} = [];
> - my $checked_nodes = PVE::QemuServer::check_local_storage_availability($vmconf, $storecfg);
> + $checked_nodes = PVE::QemuServer::check_local_storage_availability($vmconf, $storecfg);
> delete $checked_nodes->{$localnode};
> + }
>
> - foreach my $node (keys %$checked_nodes) {
> - my $missing_mappings = $missing_mappings_by_node->{$node};
> - if (scalar($missing_mappings->@*)) {
> - $checked_nodes->{$node}->{'unavailable-resources'} = $missing_mappings;
> - next;
> - }
> + foreach my $node ((keys $checked_nodes->%*, keys $missing_mappings_by_node->%*)) {
Style nit: please use 'for' instead of 'foreach'
Like this you might iterate over certain nodes twice and then push them
onto the allowed_nodes array twice.
> + my $missing_mappings = $missing_mappings_by_node->{$node};
> + if (scalar($missing_mappings->@*)) {
> + $checked_nodes->{$node}->{'unavailable-resources'} = $missing_mappings;
> + next;
> + }
>
> + if (!$res->{running}) {
> if (!defined($checked_nodes->{$node}->{unavailable_storages})) {
> - push @{$res->{allowed_nodes}}, $node;
> + push $allowed_nodes->@*, $node;
> }
> -
> }
> - $res->{not_allowed_nodes} = $checked_nodes;
> }
> + $res->{not_allowed_nodes} = $checked_nodes if scalar(keys($checked_nodes->%*)) || !$res->{running};
Why not return the empty hash if running? The whole post-if is just
covering that single special case.
> + $res->{allowed_nodes} = $allowed_nodes if scalar($allowed_nodes->@*) || !$res->{running};
Nit: Right now, $allowed_nodes can only be non-empty if
!$res->{running}, so the first part of the check is redundant.
>
> my $local_disks = &$check_vm_disks_local($storecfg, $vmconf, $vmid);
> $res->{local_disks} = [ values %$local_disks ];;