From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 390E41FF0E7 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 10:27:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0BB6921587; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 10:27:06 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <1e0178c1-0137-405e-82a0-e35041d40c25@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 10:26:58 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH-SERIES docs/storage 0/3] close #7204: document and check that thin pools have zeroing enabled From: Fiona Ebner To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260205163819.219322-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <20260205163819.219322-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1786523207781 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.919 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust 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: U65P2PQGAXOBRLRV74ZGFTZIXWXBP7XR X-Message-ID-Hash: U65P2PQGAXOBRLRV74ZGFTZIXWXBP7XR X-MailFrom: f.ebner@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: Ping Am 05.02.26 um 5:37 PM schrieb Fiona Ebner: > There were a bunch of new reports in the last week. Not sure why, > maybe a bogus tutorial out there or something along those lines. > > Thin pools with zeroing during allocation turned off are currently not > supported for VM images. Using such a pool may lead to data > corruption for various operations like drive mirror. > > Document this and add a check in the storage plugin upon storage > activation. > > In the future, a dedicated storage configuration option could be > introduced that can be checked by volume_has_feature() and enforced > upon storage activation. > > docs: > > Fiona Ebner (1): > close #7204: storage: lvm thin: document that thin pools must have > zeroing enabled > > pve-storage-lvmthin.adoc | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > storage: > > Fiona Ebner (2): > lvm plugin: list volumes: also query 'zero' property > close #7204: lvm thin plugin: die if thin pool does not have zeroing > configured > > src/PVE/Storage/LVMPlugin.pm | 6 ++++-- > src/PVE/Storage/LvmThinPlugin.pm | 17 ++++++++++++++++- > 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > Summary over all repositories: > 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >