From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.ebner@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 5B61595804
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:09:48 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4290F8FF1
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:09:18 +0200 (CEST)
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
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:09:16 +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 7D2924513F
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:09:16 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <90c9797f-d7f1-40f8-b590-9a0adb8da572@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:09:15 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
References: <20240325110012.26547-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <1712842343.po3jyesool.astroid@yuna.none>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <1712842343.po3jyesool.astroid@yuna.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.071 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
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH container] mountpoint mount: activate
 PVE-managed volumes during preparation
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: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 11:09:48 -0000

Am 11.04.24 um 15:35 schrieb Fabian Grünbichler:
> On March 25, 2024 12:00 pm, Fiona Ebner wrote:
>> +	PVE::Storage::activate_volumes($storage_cfg, [$volid]);
> 
> shouldn't this atually pass $snapname as well? for some storages this
> does make quite the difference ;)
> 
> there is also one more call in pct.pm (for the `pct fsck` command) that
> seems to lack activation before mapping.
> 

Yes, totally missed that mountpoint_mount() supports passing a snapname.
Fixed in v2 and also added the activation for fsck:
https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/2024-April/062909.html