From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
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 AF51A743AF
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 18:00:45 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A5C4ACCE5
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 18:00:15 +0200 (CEST)
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 A6B86CCD7
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 18:00:11 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7279145A83
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 18:00:11 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <2bdd3dc6-d7bd-6b41-1d58-e44d56664575@proxmox.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2021 18:00:10 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:88.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/88.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Fabian Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
References: <20210415101057.2836-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210415101057.2836-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.040 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_BLACK 3 Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist [drive.pm]
Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH qemu-server] drive: volume in-use
 check: fix fallback path comparison
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>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2021 16:00:45 -0000

On 15.04.21 12:10, Fabian Ebner wrote:
> When checking whether a volume is still referenced by a snapshot, the void
> itself is first checked. When the volid is different, we fall back to comparing
> the path.
> 
> As the first value to be compared is a volume's path, the second value better be
> a volume's path too, and not a snapshot's path.
> 
> See also 77019edfe0c190c949cdc0b0e3b4ad2ca37313b3 for historical context.
> 
> The error that led me here:
> * had a VM with ZFS over iSCSI storage with an exsiting snapshot
> * add new unused drive
> * try to remove the unsued drive
> * fails, because ZFS (not Pool!) Plugin does not support snapshot paths.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Fabian Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
> ---
>  PVE/QemuServer/Drive.pm | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
>

applied, thanks! But see my other mail to this patch for a potential follow-up