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 178DB622DB for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:25:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0AE8827532 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:25:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (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 44B4627528 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:25:35 +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 0B2C243E9D for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:25:35 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:25:32 +0100 From: Dominic =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E4ger?= To: Proxmox VE development discussion Message-ID: <20201123102532.GA2145829@mala.proxmox.com> References: <20201123101229.18308-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20201123101229.18308-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 1.688 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment 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 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [config.pm, proxmox.com] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH container] snapshot creation: only check volumes for fsfreeze 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: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 10:25:36 -0000 Fixes the issue for me. Tested-by: Dominic Jäger On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 11:12:29AM +0100, Stoiko Ivanov wrote: > fix #3161 > > When considering mountpoints for running 'fsfreeze' before snapshot creation, > commit 8463099d99273561c46398bf02206b4d9d431bc5 did not only consider > volumes created by our storage-stack, but also bindmounts and devmounts > (directly mounting a blockdevice). > > This led to PVE::Storage::parse_volume_id failing on those mountpoints. > > Since the fsfreeze call is best-effort and only run for specific > storageplugins, we can simply skip non-volume mountpoints, when gathering > the list of volumes to call fsfreeze on. > > Tested with a container with a bindmount. > > Signed-off-by: Stoiko Ivanov > --- > Sorry for that - will test my container patches with a more complete container > config from now on :/ > > src/PVE/LXC/Config.pm | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/src/PVE/LXC/Config.pm b/src/PVE/LXC/Config.pm > index 9834866..db453f8 100644 > --- a/src/PVE/LXC/Config.pm > +++ b/src/PVE/LXC/Config.pm > @@ -139,6 +139,8 @@ sub __snapshot_freeze { > $class->foreach_volume($conf, sub { > my ($ms, $mountpoint) = @_; > > + return if $mountpoint->{type} ne 'volume'; > + > if (PVE::Storage::volume_snapshot_needs_fsfreeze($storagecfg, $mountpoint->{volume})) { > push @$freeze_mps, $mountpoint->{mp}; > } > -- > 2.20.1 > > > > _______________________________________________ > pve-devel mailing list > pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel > >