From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00A011FF14C for ; Fri, 29 May 2026 21:50:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 126567E9; Fri, 29 May 2026 21:50:38 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Lamprecht To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Fiona Ebner Subject: applied: [PATCH-SERIES storage/qemu-server v3 00/11] fix #7094: external snapshot delete: ensure commit target is large enough Date: Fri, 29 May 2026 21:49:59 +0200 Message-ID: <178008419750.1121358.5044729878266348024.b4-ty@b4> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20260519110646.25060-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> References: <20260519110646.25060-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1780084203154 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.120 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 KAM_LOTSOFHASH 0.25 Emails with lots of hash-like gibberish SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: AOF27NKMEYMWPFFBZOD4A7XEFQW23CX6 X-Message-ID-Hash: AOF27NKMEYMWPFFBZOD4A7XEFQW23CX6 X-MailFrom: t.lamprecht@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue, 19 May 2026 13:06:25 +0200, Fiona Ebner wrote: > Changes in v3: > * rebase on latest master, need to bump APIAGE+VER one more > > Changes in v2: > * rebase on latest master. > > For LVM storages using 'snapshot-as-volume-chain', it's necessary to > ensure that the size for the LV of the target snapshot volume is large > enough before doing a commit operation. This affects both the offline > and the online case, which have different code paths. > > [...] Applied, thanks! [01/10] plugin: document volume_snapshot_info() method commit: e48f10d2f64f374b035a88f8730adf32526941ca [02/10] plugin: volume snapshot info: also return virtual size commit: 1218bd79165273120adc9e60f80c94aedb2ea761 [03/10] plugin: document volume_resize() method commit: 17545ce276a8feb060b850c160c8901cbe479990 [04/10] plugin/storage: volume resize: add snapname parameter commit: b56c2d04e3d70d7d08e394bc56c65ba0772014c2 [05/10] lvm plugin: snapshot delete: clarify comment about using commit commit: edcf4bfb322b21499e3007ea1cddfcd98537b3b8 [06/10] bump API age and version commit: 2f7f7754425597c07a48869c592748c7b57f2db7 [07/10] partially fix #7094: lvm: snapshot delete: ensure commit target is large enough commit: ee91a30f03ce810dd799a8a7577a352bf6ef316c [08/10] plugin: volume snapshot info: don't set 'order' for internal snapshots commit: 43d630f85864ef0fb2490f975c47cea50a88fd10 [09/10] plugin: volume snapshot info: correctly return internal snapshot information commit: a7ff389fe2992eb95d7701cc046c3c05d1b91069 [10/10] plugin: volume snapshot info: do not set 'ext' property commit: c0a77f74f790350562ab40cc0c13f344b55b9599 [qemu-server] [1/1] partially fix #7094: external snapshot delete: ensure commit target is large enough commit: 30e41d065623380cd4106f0524326c4da75b1cc9