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 1D85D917B8 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2022 16:02:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id F343E9CE2 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2022 16:02:55 +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 ; Wed, 21 Dec 2022 16:02:54 +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 ECC3044EB9 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2022 16:02:53 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 16:02:46 +0100 From: Fabian =?iso-8859-1?q?Gr=FCnbichler?= To: Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20221121131303.268816-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20221121131303.268816-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: astroid/0.16.0 (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid) Message-Id: <1671634557.1x9i16kwe4.astroid@yuna.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.132 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 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com, qemu.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v2 qemu-server 1/1] Do not start VM twice when rollbacking with --start 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: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 15:02:56 -0000 On November 21, 2022 2:13 pm, Stefan Hanreich wrote: > When rollbacking to the snapshot of a VM that includes RAM, the VM > gets started by the rollback task anyway, so no additional start task is > needed. Previously, when running rollback with the --start parameter > and the VM snapshot includes RAM, a start task was created. That task > failed because the VM had already been started by the rollback task. >=20 > Additionally documented this behaviour in the description of the --start > parameter >=20 > Signed-off-by: Stefan Hanreich > --- >=20 > Changes v1 -> v2: > Do not parse config for checking type of snapshot but rather directly che= ck > whether VM is running or not via check_running() >=20 > PVE/API2/Qemu.pm | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >=20 > diff --git a/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm b/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm > index 6bdcce2..691202d 100644 > --- a/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm > +++ b/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm > @@ -5064,7 +5064,8 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ > snapname =3D> get_standard_option('pve-snapshot-name'), > start =3D> { > type =3D> 'boolean', > - description =3D> "Whether the VM should get started after rolling back= successfully", > + description =3D> "Whether the VM should get started after rolling back= successfully." > + . " A VM will always be started when rollbacking a snapshot with R= AM included, regardless of this parameter.", this is worded a bit weird (I don't think that "rollbacking" is a word ;)),= how about: . "(Note: VMs will be automatically started if the snapshot includes RAM.)"= , > optional =3D> 1, > default =3D> 0, > }, > @@ -5091,7 +5092,7 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ > PVE::Cluster::log_msg('info', $authuser, "rollback snapshot VM $vmi= d: $snapname"); > PVE::QemuConfig->snapshot_rollback($vmid, $snapname); > =20 > - if ($param->{start}) { > + if ($param->{start} && !PVE::QemuServer::check_running($vmid)) { unless I am missing something, this should use PVE::QemuServer::Helpers::vm_running_locally($vmid) we are holding the guest migration lock for the whole rollback worker, and snapshot_rollback loads the config, so we know it is on the current node at= this point and just checking whether a matching qemu process is running after th= e rollback is enough. > PVE::API2::Qemu->vm_start({ vmid =3D> $vmid, node =3D> $node }); > } > }; > --=20 > 2.30.2 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > pve-devel mailing list > pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel >=20 >=20 >=20