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 BE4A7907E8 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:20:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9D42D197CB for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:19:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lana.proxmox.com (unknown [94.136.29.99]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:19:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: by lana.proxmox.com (Postfix, from userid 10043) id BD1AA2C21CB; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:19:44 +0200 (CEST) From: Stefan Hanreich To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:19:43 +0200 Message-Id: <20220922131943.4066317-4-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.30.2 In-Reply-To: <20220922131943.4066317-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> References: <20220922131943.4066317-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.193 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 KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY 1 Sending domain does not have any anti-forgery methods NO_DNS_FOR_FROM 0.001 Envelope sender has no MX or A DNS records RDNS_NONE 0.793 Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_NONE 0.001 SPF: sender does not publish an 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. [qemu.pm] Subject: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server 1/1] Add pre/post-restore hooks to VMs 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: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 13:20:16 -0000 Signed-off-by: Stefan Hanreich --- There might be a better way to differentiate the different errors from restorefn in the error handling logic, although I think in this case it is still fine. This might get a bit messy though if in the future someone adds another source for errors. Maybe add a single if before the restored_data checks instead? PVE/API2/Qemu.pm | 10 ++++++++-- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm b/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm index 3ec31c2..fe41634 100644 --- a/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm +++ b/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm @@ -884,9 +884,13 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ die "$emsg $@" if $@; my $restored_data = 0; + my $hook_executed = 0; my $restorefn = sub { my $conf = PVE::QemuConfig->load_config($vmid); + PVE::GuestHelpers::exec_hookscript($conf, $vmid, 'pre-restore', 1); + $hook_executed = 1; + PVE::QemuConfig->check_protection($conf, $emsg); die "$emsg vm is running\n" if PVE::QemuServer::check_running($vmid); @@ -918,6 +922,8 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ eval { PVE::QemuServer::template_create($vmid, $restored_conf) }; warn $@ if $@; } + + PVE::GuestHelpers::exec_hookscript($restored_conf, $vmid, 'post-restore'); }; # ensure no old replication state are exists @@ -1012,10 +1018,10 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ if (my $err = $@) { eval { PVE::QemuConfig->remove_lock($vmid, 'create') }; warn $@ if $@; - if ($restored_data) { + if ($hook_executed && $restored_data) { warn "error after data was restored, VM disks should be OK but config may " ."require adaptions. VM $vmid state is NOT cleaned up.\n"; - } else { + } elsif ($hook_executed && !$restored_data) { warn "error before or during data restore, some or all disks were not " ."completely restored. VM $vmid state is NOT cleaned up.\n"; } -- 2.30.2