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 D3EBB60D30
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 14:34:20 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CAA701FB61
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 14:33:50 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (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 665A91FB56
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 14:33:50 +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 3DAF046DC6
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 14:33:50 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <7cd9f084-8065-4c3f-8a65-a1df2021a848@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 14:33:49 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:98.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/98.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Fabian Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
References: <20220216104749.47039-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220216104749.47039-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.058 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
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
 http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
 information. [qemuserver.pm]
Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH qemu-server] clone disk: force raw
 format for TPM state
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: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 13:34:20 -0000

On 16.02.22 11:47, Fabian Ebner wrote:
> The format can't be qcow2 for TPM state, because swtpm reads the file
> directly expecting raw data.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Fabian Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
> ---
> 
> The DiskStorageSelector in the UI hides the format for TPM state, but
> still sends along format=qcow2 triggering this bug. Still, the fix
> should be in the backend.
> 

IMO the frontend shouldn't send that though and in a next major version the backend
should bail on that, as it can be confusing to do such things "magically".

>  PVE/QemuServer.pm | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
>

applied, thanks!