From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 894A61FF141
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Tue, 30 Jun 2026 15:41:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9BF422141B;
	Tue, 30 Jun 2026 15:41:52 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <576f756c-9c81-4058-9b41-ed81a1a66a07@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2026 15:41:16 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH container v9 05/10] allow pending mount point changes if
 storage is gone
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Michael_K=C3=B6ppl?= <m.koeppl@proxmox.com>,
 pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
References: <20260629140439.184878-1-m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
 <20260629140439.184878-6-m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20260629140439.184878-6-m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2
X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1782826864754
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
	DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
	KAM_DMARC_STATUS         0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict
 Alignment (newer systems)
	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: DPORD6IG7LRBNS3GTCBB4K4CYIQJJBU7
X-Message-ID-Hash: DPORD6IG7LRBNS3GTCBB4K4CYIQJJBU7
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 <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:pve-devel-owner@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:pve-devel-join@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pve-devel-leave@lists.proxmox.com>

Am 29.06.26 um 4:06 PM schrieb Michael Köppl:
> Previously, applying a pending removal of an unused volume whose
> backing storage was already removed would fail with "unable to apply
> pending change unusedN", leaving a dangling reference that could never
> be cleaned up.
> 
> Guard the volume deletion in vmconfig_apply_pending and
> vmconfig_hotplug_pending with a check to ensure that the storage
> exists. If the storage is gone, drop the entry with a warning instead of
> trying to free a volume that no longer exists.
> 
> Apply the same check when a detached mount point is turned into an
> 'unusedN' entry, so a volume on a removed storage is not re-added as a
> dangling unused entry, matching VM behavior.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael Köppl <m.koeppl@proxmox.com>
> ---
>  src/PVE/LXC/Config.pm | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/src/PVE/LXC/Config.pm b/src/PVE/LXC/Config.pm
> index c8098538..a3dd3a1a 100644
> --- a/src/PVE/LXC/Config.pm
> +++ b/src/PVE/LXC/Config.pm

Missing import for PVE::RESTEnvironment.

> @@ -1663,8 +1663,14 @@ sub vmconfig_hotplug_pending {
>                  # pass
>              } elsif ($opt =~ m/^unused(\d+)$/) {
>                  my $volid = $class->parse_volume($opt, $conf->{$opt})->{volume};
> -                PVE::LXC::delete_mountpoint_volume($storecfg, $vmid, $volid)
> -                    if !$class->is_volume_in_use($conf, $volid, 1, 1);
> +                my ($storeid) = PVE::Storage::parse_volume_id($volid);
> +                if (PVE::Storage::storage_config($storecfg, $storeid, 1)) {
> +                    PVE::LXC::delete_mountpoint_volume($storecfg, $vmid, $volid)
> +                        if !$class->is_volume_in_use($conf, $volid, 1, 1);
> +                } else {
> +                    PVE::RESTEnvironment::log_warn(
> +                        "storage '$storeid' no longer exists, unused volume '$volid' will be removed");
> +                }

Style nit: should we add a helper for readability/to reduce bloat and
repetition?

I'm thinking about something like

with_checked_volid($opt, $conf->{opt}, sub {
    my ($volid) = @_;
    PVE::LXC::delete_mountpoint_volume($storecfg, $vmid, $volid)
        if !$class->is_volume_in_use($conf, $volid, 1, 1);
});

where the helper does the parsing of the volume and volid, logs the
warning and returns if the storage does not exist and calls the
passed-in sub if it does exist.