From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A8FB1FF2AD for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2024 13:05:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9887730F54; Thu, 4 Jul 2024 13:05:47 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 13:05:14 +0200 From: Gabriel Goller To: Christian Ebner Message-ID: <20240704110514.sjnhuad7gvjauqgw@luna.proxmox.com> References: <20240703145857.456017-1-g.goller@proxmox.com> <5a00a218-653a-4988-8c64-9a66432be5cb@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5a00a218-653a-4988-8c64-9a66432be5cb@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.055 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 Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup] datastore: remove unsafe from function X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion Cc: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pbs-devel" On 04.07.2024 11:59, Christian Ebner wrote: >On 7/3/24 16:58, Gabriel Goller wrote: >>`list_snapshots_blocking` doesn't need to be unsafe. > >I think that this is intentionally marked as `unsafe` to make sure the >caller really does look at the possible consequences of calling this >method. As documented, "This must not run in a main worker thread as >it potentially does tons of I/O." > >So rather than dropping the `unsafe`, maybe clarify that this is the >reason for it being declared as unsafe in the comment. > >But I guess Wolfgang can comment more on this. > Oh, well, didn't know that. Will add a comment :) _______________________________________________ pbs-devel mailing list pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel