From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 6C35FBDC7 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 10:04:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 61162C625 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 10:04:13 +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 3B318C61C for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 10:04:12 +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 08E0C42DD1 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 10:04:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2022 10:04:04 +0200 From: Fabian =?iso-8859-1?q?Gr=FCnbichler?= To: Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20220406114657.452190-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20220406114657.452190-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: astroid/0.15.0 (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid) Message-Id: <1649404843.ds1yioa8qv.astroid@nora.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.176 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 SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v2 storage] rbd: alloc image: fix #3970 avoid ambiguous rbd path X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2022 08:04:43 -0000 On April 6, 2022 1:46 pm, Aaron Lauterer wrote: > If two RBD storages use the same pool, but connect to different > clusters, we cannot say to which cluster the mapped RBD image belongs to > if krbd is used. To avoid potential data loss, we need to verify that no > other storage is configured that could have a volume mapped under the > same path before we create the image. >=20 > The ambiguous mapping is in > /dev/rbd/// where the namespace is optional. >=20 > Once we can tell the clusters apart in the mapping, we can remove these > checks again. >=20 > See bug #3969 for more information on the root cause. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Aaron Lauterer Acked-by: Fabian Gr=C3=BCnbichler Reviewed-by: Fabian Gr=C3=BCnbichler (small nit below, and given the rather heavy-handed approach a 2nd ack=20 might not hurt.. IMHO, a few easily fixable false-positives beat more=20 users actually running into this with move disk/volume and losing=20 data..) > --- > changes since > v1: > * fixed code style issues > * moved check to a helper function and call it from > - alloc_image > - clone_image > - rename_image > * rephrased error message with a link to the bugzilla issue >=20 > RFC: > * moved check to pve-storage since containers and VMs both have issues > not just on a move or clone of the image, but also when creating a new > volume > * reworked the checks, instead of large if conditions, we use > PVE::Tools::safe_compare with comparison functions > * normalize monhost list to match correctly if the list is in different > order > * add storage name to error message that triggered the checks > * ignore disabled storages >=20 > PVE/Storage/RBDPlugin.pm | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+) >=20 > diff --git a/PVE/Storage/RBDPlugin.pm b/PVE/Storage/RBDPlugin.pm > index e287e28..2a4e1a8 100644 > --- a/PVE/Storage/RBDPlugin.pm > +++ b/PVE/Storage/RBDPlugin.pm > @@ -127,6 +127,45 @@ my $krbd_feature_update =3D sub { > } > }; > =20 > +# check if another rbd storage with the same pool name but different > +# cluster exists. If so, allocating a new volume can potentially be > +# dangerous because the RBD mapping, exposes it in an ambiguous way unde= r > +# /dev/rbd///. Without any information to which cluster= it > +# belongs, we cannot clearly determine which image we access and > +# potentially use the wrong one. See > +# https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D3969 and > +# https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D3970 > +# TODO: remove these checks once #3969 is fixed and we can clearly tell = to > +# which cluster an image belongs to > +my $check_blockdev_collision =3D sub { > + my ($storeid, $scfg) =3D @_; parameter order is reversed compared to our pve-storage convention,=20 might be worthy of a fixup on application to match the rest: my ($scfg, $storeid) =3D @_; > + > + my $storecfg =3D PVE::Storage::config(); > + foreach my $store (keys %{$storecfg->{ids}}) { > + next if $store eq $storeid; > + > + my $checked_scfg =3D $storecfg->{ids}->{$store}; > + > + next if $checked_scfg->{type} ne 'rbd'; > + next if $checked_scfg->{disable}; > + next if $scfg->{pool} ne $checked_scfg->{pool}; > + > + my $normalize_mons =3D sub { return join(';', sort( PVE::Tools::split_l= ist(shift))) }; > + my $cmp_mons =3D sub { $normalize_mons->($_[0]) cmp $normalize_mons->($= _[1]) }; > + my $cmp =3D sub { $_[0] cmp $_[1] }; > + > + # internal and internal, or external and external with identical monito= rs > + # =3D> same cluster > + next if PVE::Tools::safe_compare($scfg->{monhost}, $checked_scfg->{monh= ost}, $cmp_mons) =3D=3D 0; > + > + # different namespaces =3D> no clash possible > + next if PVE::Tools::safe_compare($scfg->{namespace}, $checked_scfg->{na= mespace}, $cmp) !=3D 0; > + > + die "Cannot create volume on '$storeid' - RBD blockdev paths shared wit= h storage '$store'. ". > + "See https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D3969 for more d= etails.\n"; > + } > +}; > + > sub run_rbd_command { > my ($cmd, %args) =3D @_; > =20 > @@ -475,6 +514,8 @@ sub clone_image { > my $snap =3D '__base__'; > $snap =3D $snapname if length $snapname; > =20 > + $check_blockdev_collision->($storeid, $scfg); > + > my ($vtype, $basename, $basevmid, undef, undef, $isBase) =3D > $class->parse_volname($volname); > =20 > @@ -516,6 +557,8 @@ sub alloc_image { > die "illegal name '$name' - should be 'vm-$vmid-*'\n" > if $name && $name !~ m/^vm-$vmid-/; > =20 > + $check_blockdev_collision->($storeid, $scfg); > + > $name =3D $class->find_free_diskname($storeid, $scfg, $vmid) if !$na= me; > =20 > my @options =3D ( > @@ -769,6 +812,8 @@ sub volume_has_feature { > sub rename_volume { > my ($class, $scfg, $storeid, $source_volname, $target_vmid, $target_= volname) =3D @_; > =20 > + $check_blockdev_collision->($storeid, $scfg); > + > my ( > undef, > $source_image, > --=20 > 2.30.2 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > pve-devel mailing list > pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel >=20 >=20 >=20