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 22C527BB85 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 15:37:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1A33DA5A8 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 15:36:42 +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)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 94A63A59A for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 15:36:41 +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 6C1CD46014 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 15:36:41 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <79ae0f11-b5d7-2c5f-5ab6-e1e17cd8e7e5@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 15:36:40 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.1 Content-Language: en-US To: Fabian Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>, pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20211021113030.2649985-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> <e169fddf-3c71-b2a2-5ea2-b9e85820d588@proxmox.com> From: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <e169fddf-3c71-b2a2-5ea2-b9e85820d588@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.705 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 NICE_REPLY_A -1.14 Looks like a legit reply (A) 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 v3 storage qemu-server container 0/9] move disk or volume to other guests 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, 02 Nov 2021 14:37:12 -0000 On 10/27/21 13:55, Fabian Ebner wrote: > Nice work! For all patches except #8 it's only nits from my side, so those are: > > Reviewed-by: Fabian Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com> > Tested-by: Fabian Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com> > > > I did run into one strange issue with RBD upon destroying a VM, but it didn't pop up consistently and maybe it's just my cluster (all VMs were powered off): > > root@pve701 ~ # qm clone 12345 142 > /dev/rbd0 > create linked clone of drive scsi0 (rbdkvm:base-12345-disk-0) > clone base-12345-disk-0: base-12345-disk-0 snapname __base__ to vm-142-disk-0 > root@pve701 ~ # qm move_disk 142 scsi0 --target-vmid 111 --target-disk scsi3 > moving disk 'scsi0' from VM '142' to '111' > removing disk 'scsi0' from VM '142' config > update VM 111: -scsi3 rbdkvm:base-12345-disk-0/vm-111-disk-0,size=4G > /dev/rbd1 > root@pve701 ~ # qm move_disk 111 scsi3 --target-vmid 142 --target-disk scsi3 > moving disk 'scsi3' from VM '111' to '142' > removing disk 'scsi3' from VM '111' config > update VM 142: -scsi3 rbdkvm:base-12345-disk-0/vm-142-disk-0,size=4G > /dev/rbd2 > root@pve701 ~ # qm destroy 142 > 2021-10-27T12:17:13.202+0200 7f8b00d0e700 -1 librbd::image::PreRemoveRequest: 0x55e08f1cac30 check_image_watchers: image has watchers - not removing > Removing image: 0% complete...failed. > rbd: error: image still has watchers > Could not remove disk 'rbdkvm:base-12345-disk-0/vm-142-disk-0', check manually: rbd rm 'base-12345-disk-0/vm-142-disk-0' error: rbd: error: image still has watchers I also came across this issue and it seems that we do not unmap KRBD mounted images prior to renaming them. This also applies to converting a guest to a template. I have it on my TODO list to work on that in an extra patch set.