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 ED1D01FF16B for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:03:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A52E31837C; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:03:23 +0100 (CET) From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com> To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:02:46 +0100 Message-Id: <20241212100247.20926-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.053 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: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server 1/2] fix #5985: qmp client: increase timeout for {device, netdev, object}_{add, del} commands 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> In the bug report, the user mentioned that 7 seconds was enough. For the HMP 'drive_add' command, the used timeout is 1 minute and for the 'drive_del' command, the used timeout is 10 minutes, because IO might need to be finished. While something similar might be true for certain objects/devices, there were no issues reported with the *_del operations using the default timeout until now and the callers can still use a higher timeout if they know the specific device/object requires it. Signed-off-by: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com> --- PVE/QMPClient.pm | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git a/PVE/QMPClient.pm b/PVE/QMPClient.pm index abed1f01..b03f1da8 100644 --- a/PVE/QMPClient.pm +++ b/PVE/QMPClient.pm @@ -118,6 +118,15 @@ sub cmd { # the variance for Windows guests can be big. And there might be hook scripts # that are executed upon thaw, so use 3 minutes to be on the safe side. $timeout = 3 * 60; + } elsif ( + $cmd->{execute} eq 'device_add' || + $cmd->{execute} eq 'device_del' || + $cmd->{execute} eq 'netdev_add' || + $cmd->{execute} eq 'netdev_del' || + $cmd->{execute} eq 'object-add' || + $cmd->{execute} eq 'object-del' + ) { + $timeout = 60; } elsif ( $cmd->{execute} eq 'backup-cancel' || $cmd->{execute} eq 'blockdev-snapshot-delete-internal-sync' || -- 2.39.5 _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel