From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61D261FF0AE for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2026 14:26:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2CA11213D3; Tue, 13 Oct 2026 14:25:59 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2026 14:25:55 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH qemu-server v3 13/21] api: migrate: allow forwarding certain migration properties to HA From: "Daniel Kral" To: "Fiona Ebner" , X-Mailer: aerc 0.22.0-10-g6373ac9d2179-dirty References: <20260918160841.128088-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> <20260918160841.128088-14-f.ebner@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20260918160841.128088-14-f.ebner@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1791894355786 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.826 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) 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 Message-ID-Hash: 4UOCHBOFZZ5S2SMFMOVXAMMJ6VT7ADXA X-Message-ID-Hash: 4UOCHBOFZZ5S2SMFMOVXAMMJ6VT7ADXA X-MailFrom: d.kral@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 6:08 PM CEST, Fiona Ebner wrote: > diff --git a/src/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm b/src/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm > index 71247eec..b5a850a3 100644 > --- a/src/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm > +++ b/src/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm > @@ -5641,9 +5652,18 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ > my $hacmd =3D sub { > my $upid =3D shift; > =20 > - print "Requesting HA migration for VM $vmid to node $tar= get\n"; > - > + my $extra_opts =3D ''; > my $cmd =3D ['ha-manager', 'migrate', "vm:$vmid", $targe= t]; > + for my $prop (sort keys $ha_migrate_props->%*) { > + if (defined(my $value =3D $param->{$prop})) { > + push($cmd->@*, "--$prop", $value); > + $extra_opts .=3D ','; > + $extra_opts .=3D " $prop=3D$value"; > + } > + } > + > + print "Requesting HA migration for VM $vmid to node ${ta= rget}${extra_opts}\n"; --with-conntrack-state is always set to either 0 or 1, so essentially any output will always contain at least Requesting HA migration for VM 100 to node node1, with-conntrack-state=3D0 or Requesting HA migration for VM 100 to node node1, with-conntrack-state=3D1 Unrelated to the patch series, but in this specific case it would probably suffice to not explicitly set $param->{'with-conntrack-state'} to 0 if not requested by the user directly. Might be nice to use parenthesis here and for pve-container as well, so that the less important information (the migration options) are more separated from the main message (the requested migration): Requesting HA migration for VM 100 to node node1 (with-conntrack-state=3D1) > + > run_command($cmd); > return; > };