From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A0F41FF16B
for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2025 12:58:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4AC4DDEC9;
Thu, 9 Jan 2025 12:58:14 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2025 12:57:40 +0100 (CET)
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <1616359919.832.1736423860189@webmail.proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.208.1734340369.332.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20241216091229.3142660-1-alexandre.derumier@groupe-cyllene.com>
<mailman.208.1734340369.332.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.6-Rev72
X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 0.047 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: [pve-devel] [PATCH v3 qemu-server 10/11] blockdev: add
backing_chain support
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>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
> Alexandre Derumier via pve-devel <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> hat am 16.12.2024 10:12 CET geschrieben:
> We need to define name-nodes for all backing chain images,
> to be able to live rename them with blockdev-reopen
>
> For linked clone, we don't need to definebase image(s) chain.
> They are auto added with #block nodename.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Derumier <alexandre.derumier@groupe-cyllene.com>
> ---
> PVE/QemuServer.pm | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/PVE/QemuServer.pm b/PVE/QemuServer.pm
> index dc12b38f..3a3feadf 100644
> --- a/PVE/QemuServer.pm
> +++ b/PVE/QemuServer.pm
> @@ -1618,6 +1618,38 @@ sub generate_throttle_group {
> return $throttle_group;
> }
>
> +sub generate_backing_blockdev {
> + my ($storecfg, $snapshots, $deviceid, $drive, $id) = @_;
> +
> + my $snapshot = $snapshots->{$id};
> + my $order = $snapshot->{order};
> + my $parentid = $snapshot->{parent};
> + my $snap_fmt_nodename = "fmt-$deviceid-$order";
> + my $snap_file_nodename = "file-$deviceid-$order";
would it make sense to use the snapshot name here instead of the order? that would allow a deterministic mapping even when snapshots are removed..
> +
> + my $snap_file_blockdev = generate_file_blockdev($storecfg, $drive, $snap_file_nodename);
> + $snap_file_blockdev->{filename} = $snapshot->{file};
> + my $snap_fmt_blockdev = generate_format_blockdev($storecfg, $drive, $snap_fmt_nodename, $snap_file_blockdev, 1);
> + $snap_fmt_blockdev->{backing} = generate_backing_blockdev($storecfg, $snapshots, $deviceid, $drive, $parentid) if $parentid;
> + return $snap_fmt_blockdev;
> +}
> +
> +sub generate_backing_chain_blockdev {
> + my ($storecfg, $deviceid, $drive) = @_;
> +
> + my $volid = $drive->{file};
> + my $do_snapshots_with_qemu = do_snapshots_with_qemu($storecfg, $volid, $deviceid);
> + return if !$do_snapshots_with_qemu || $do_snapshots_with_qemu != 2;
> +
> + my $chain_blockdev = undef;
> + PVE::Storage::activate_volumes($storecfg, [$volid]);
> + #should we use qemu config to list snapshots ?
from a data consistency PoV, trusting the qcow2 metadata is probably safer.. but we could check that the storage and the config agree, and error out otherwise?
> + my $snapshots = PVE::Storage::volume_snapshot_info($storecfg, $volid);
> + my $parentid = $snapshots->{'current'}->{parent};
> + $chain_blockdev = generate_backing_blockdev($storecfg, $snapshots, $deviceid, $drive, $parentid) if $parentid;
> + return $chain_blockdev;
> +}
> +
> sub generate_file_blockdev {
> my ($storecfg, $drive, $nodename) = @_;
>
> @@ -1816,6 +1848,8 @@ sub generate_drive_blockdev {
> my $blockdev_file = generate_file_blockdev($storecfg, $drive, $file_nodename);
> my $fmt_nodename = "fmt-drive-$drive_id";
> my $blockdev_format = generate_format_blockdev($storecfg, $drive, $fmt_nodename, $blockdev_file, $force_readonly);
> + my $backing_chain = generate_backing_chain_blockdev($storecfg, "drive-$drive_id", $drive);
> + $blockdev_format->{backing} = $backing_chain if $backing_chain;
>
> my $blockdev_live_restore = undef;
> if ($live_restore_name) {
> --
> 2.39.5
_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel