From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <s.reiter@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 CA4BD72047
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 11:16:21 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9D24A22E77
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 11:15:51 +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 C1CF922E69
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 11:15:50 +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 9476342E47
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 11:15:50 +0200 (CEST)
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
Fabian Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
References: <20210413082414.32241-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
<78d32c42-cb8e-49e8-66e3-590669333fd5@proxmox.com>
From: Stefan Reiter <s.reiter@proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <a75d77bf-f293-b712-a8bf-f95fd316f69d@proxmox.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2021 11:15:49 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <78d32c42-cb8e-49e8-66e3-590669333fd5@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 0.906 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 -0.144 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] [RFC qemu-server] avoid setting lun number for
drives when pvscsi controller is used
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, 14 Jun 2021 09:16:21 -0000
On 6/14/21 8:29 AM, Fabian Ebner wrote:
> Any feedback for this?
>
Looks good to me and works as advertised:
Reviewed-by: Stefan Reiter <s.reiter@proxmox.com>
Tested-by: Stefan Reiter <s.reiter@proxmox.com>
The `$unit = $drive->{index} % maxdev` logic doesn't seem useful here though, I
think it's a copy/paste from the IDE/SATA code below (it was already used before
this patch). How about this for a cleanup on top:
diff --git a/PVE/QemuServer.pm b/PVE/QemuServer.pm
index c00bde1..afd47b5 100644
--- a/PVE/QemuServer.pm
+++ b/PVE/QemuServer.pm
@@ -1424,7 +1424,6 @@ sub print_drivedevice_full {
} elsif ($drive->{interface} eq 'scsi') {
my ($maxdev, $controller, $controller_prefix) = scsihw_infos($conf, $drive);
- my $unit = $drive->{index} % $maxdev;
my $devicetype = 'hd';
my $path = '';
if (drive_is_cdrom($drive)) {
@@ -1452,7 +1451,7 @@ sub print_drivedevice_full {
}
if (!$conf->{scsihw} || $conf->{scsihw} =~ m/^lsi/ || $conf->{scsihw} eq 'pvscsi') {
- $device = "scsi-$devicetype,bus=$controller_prefix$controller.0,scsi-id=$unit";
+ $device = "scsi-$devicetype,bus=$controller_prefix$controller.0,scsi-id=$drive->{index}";
} else {
$device = "scsi-$devicetype,bus=$controller_prefix$controller.0,channel=0,scsi-id=0"
.",lun=$drive->{index}";
> Am 13.04.21 um 10:24 schrieb Fabian Ebner:
>> Reported in the community forum[0].
>>
>> In QEMU's hw/scsi/vmw_pvscsi.c in the SCSIBusInfo struct, the max_lun property
>> is set to 0. This means that in our stack, one cannot have multiple disks and
>> use 'scsihw: pvscsi' currently, as kvm would fail with
>> bad scsi device lun: 1
>>
>> Instead of increasing the lun number, increase the scsi-id, as we already do for
>> lsi.* (in hw/scsi/lsi53c895a.c the max_lun property is also 0).
>>
>> [0]: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/kvm-bad-scsi-device-lun-1.84318/
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fabian Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
>> ---
>>
>> I'm not experienced in this area, so not at all sure if this is the proper
>> solution/workaround.
>>
>> PVE/QemuServer.pm | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/PVE/QemuServer.pm b/PVE/QemuServer.pm
>> index fdb2ac9..4ce663b 100644
>> --- a/PVE/QemuServer.pm
>> +++ b/PVE/QemuServer.pm
>> @@ -1451,7 +1451,7 @@ sub print_drivedevice_full {
>> }
>> }
>>
>> - if (!$conf->{scsihw} || ($conf->{scsihw} =~ m/^lsi/)){
>> + if (!$conf->{scsihw} || $conf->{scsihw} =~ m/^lsi/ || $conf->{scsihw} eq 'pvscsi') {
>> $device = "scsi-$devicetype,bus=$controller_prefix$controller.0,scsi-id=$unit";
>> } else {
>> $device = "scsi-$devicetype,bus=$controller_prefix$controller.0,channel=0,scsi-id=0"
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pve-devel mailing list
> pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
> https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
>
>