From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 A3572C3FE for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 17:16:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8403636457 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 17:16:11 +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 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 17:16:09 +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 2749D44E4A for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 17:16:09 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <9bd03673-6809-13a9-deba-e00ec3d976ac@proxmox.com> Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 17:16:07 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.5.0 To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20221128112949.75356-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Stefan Hrdlicka In-Reply-To: <20221128112949.75356-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -1.426 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% ENA_SUBJ_ODD_CASE 3.2 Subject has odd case KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.257 Looks like a legit reply (A) 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] [RFC v2 storage] Revert "Fix #2020: use /sys to map nvmeXnY to nvmeX" X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 16:16:11 -0000 Tried this change locally. Didn't break smart output for me :). Tested-by: Stefan Hrdlicka On 11/28/22 12:29, Fiona Ebner wrote: > This reverts commit c3442aa5546b029a524928d10c7ecabe0024c137. > > Nowadays, relying on 'readlink /sys/block/nvmeXnY/device' won't always > lead to the correct device, as reported in the community forum[0], > where it results in '../../nvme-subsys0' and there's no matching entry > under '/dev/'. > > Since Linux kernel 5.4, in particular commit 733e4b69d508 ("nvme: > Assign subsys instance from first ctrl"), the problematic situation > from bug #2020 shouldn't happen anymore. > > Stated more clearly by the commit's author here[1]: >> Indeed, that commit will make the naming a bit more sane and will >> definitely prevent mistaken identity. It is still possible to >> observe controllers with instances that don't match their >> namespaces, but it is impossible to get a namespace instance that >> matches a non-owning controller. > > The only other user of get_sysdir_info() doesn't use the 'device' > entry, so reverting that part is fine too. > > [0] https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/113962/ > [1] https://github.com/linux-nvme/nvme-cli/issues/510#issuecomment-552508647 > > Signed-off-by: Fiona Ebner > ---