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 DA0141FF165 for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Thu, 5 Jun 2025 16:16:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6FC4F1A36F; Thu, 5 Jun 2025 16:17:08 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 16:17:04 +0200 (CEST) From: =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> To: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>, Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> Message-ID: <1715554393.3099.1749133024392@webmail.proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <3ae9921d-cc0a-460b-a560-b5edd97c1556@proxmox.com> References: <20250603075558.627850-1-alexandre.derumier@groupe-cyllene.com> <mailman.237.1748948724.395.pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> <3ae9921d-cc0a-460b-a560-b5edd97c1556@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.6-Rev78 X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.045 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 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. 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 qemu-server 01/13] blockdev: cmdline: add blockdev syntax 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> > Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com> hat am 05.06.2025 15:23 CEST geschrieben: > > > Am 03.06.25 um 09:55 schrieb Alexandre Derumier via pve-devel: > > +sub encode_nodename { > > + my ($type, $volid, $snap) = @_; > > + > > + my $nodename = "$volid"; > > + $nodename .= "-$snap" if $snap; > > This will lead to clashes in some cases: > 1. Currently, we allow attaching the same volume multiple times to a > single guest. > 2. You can end up with the same name for > volname = vm-1234-disk-0-foo > and for > volname = vm-1234-disk-0, snap = foo > > The latter can be rather easily fixed by just using a character we don't > usually support for volume names, but not the former. So I'd like to do > the switch to -blockdev without support for "looking up which node a > certain volume is" at first. In general, I feel like mixing the switch > to -blockdev with your larger series is too much at once. We should > first get the switch to -blockdev completely and cleanly sorted out, > then we can add your external qcow2 support on top. > > I think we can even rely on auto-generated-by-QEMU node names at first. > We can later switch to a variant where node names encode additional > information. Or we could also think about patching QEMU to better fit > the need for the "looking up which node a certain volume is" feature. > But I don't think figuring this out should block us right now for the > switch to "-blockdev". > > I'll try to work out a series that focuses just on the switch to > "-blockdev" based on your patches during the next week or so. Maybe not > much else needs to be changed :) The work is certainly greatly appreciated! > > @Fabian opinions? I think this is a good disentanglement approach, provided we keep anything "special" required by the qcow2 series in mind while doing so (to avoid the need for double compat hacks). _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel