From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@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 7E5DD9317F
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 16:43:24 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4E164D33E
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 16:43:24 +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
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 16:43:22 +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 8D6AB450D8
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 16:43:22 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <0b962a8c-9b6c-d2f9-f515-322919381baa@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 16:43:21 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/109.0
Content-Language: en-GB
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
References: <20230103144501.1103523-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230103144501.1103523-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 1.539 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 -3.142 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
URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
information. [qemuserver.pm]
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server] fix #4358: destroy_vm: Ignore
'suspended' lock when destroying VM
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, 03 Jan 2023 15:43:24 -0000
Am 03/01/2023 um 15:45 schrieb Stefan Hanreich:
> Since there is not really a reason why hibernated VMs shouldn't be
IMO the key that this is safe is that there's now (well since quite a while)
two locks so that going into suspension and being actually suspended can be
differentiated via the `suspending` (not safe) and `suspended` (safe) locks.
Maybe that could be worked in the commit message (could do son on applying it)
> able to be removed, we can safely ignore the 'suspended' lock in
> destroy_vm.
Is the saved VM state then actually cleaned up?
Maybe a extra hint for such things in the web UI could be nice, but
must not necessarily be tied to this patch (series).
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
> ---
> PVE/QemuServer.pm | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/PVE/QemuServer.pm b/PVE/QemuServer.pm
> index 39fc6b0..5dae168 100644
> --- a/PVE/QemuServer.pm
> +++ b/PVE/QemuServer.pm
> @@ -2341,7 +2341,9 @@ sub destroy_vm {
>
> my $conf = PVE::QemuConfig->load_config($vmid);
>
> - PVE::QemuConfig->check_lock($conf) if !$skiplock;
> + if (!$skiplock && !PVE::QemuConfig->has_lock($conf, 'suspended')) {
> + PVE::QemuConfig->check_lock($conf);
> + }
>
> if ($conf->{template}) {
> # check if any base image is still used by a linked clone