From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A58091FF17E
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Thu,  2 Oct 2025 14:18:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 12516E5DA;
	Thu,  2 Oct 2025 14:19:01 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2025 14:18:26 +0200
Message-Id: <DD7TWQ9HDCTS.1BUUMCYWJ5CJA@proxmox.com>
To: "Proxmox VE development discussion" <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Cc: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
From: "Daniel Kral" <d.kral@proxmox.com>
X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.0
References: <20251001140253.121445-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
 <20251001140253.121445-2-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20251001140253.121445-2-f.ebner@proxmox.com>
X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2
X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1759407483164
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.015 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 ha-manager 1/1] api: relocate/migrate
 resource: improve initialization of variables to avoid Perl warning
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>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>

On Wed Oct 1, 2025 at 4:02 PM CEST, Fiona Ebner wrote:
> diff --git a/src/PVE/HA/Config.pm b/src/PVE/HA/Config.pm
> index 301c62f..b52465f 100644
> --- a/src/PVE/HA/Config.pm
> +++ b/src/PVE/HA/Config.pm
> @@ -397,6 +397,7 @@ sub get_resource_motion_info {
>          push @$dependent_resources, $_ for sort keys %$together;
>  
>          for my $node (keys %$ns) {
> +            $blocking_resources_by_node->{$node} = [];

Unfortunately this breaks some callers of get_resource_motion_info(...),
which assume that a set $blocking_resources_by_node->{$node} means that
there was some blocking HA resource on that node, e.g.

$ ha-manager crm-command migrate vm:10000 node2
cannot migrate resource 'vm:10000' to node 'node2':

even though vm:10000 isn't in any HA rule. It might also break the
migrate precondition API in pve-container and qemu-server as it will not
add the node to 'allowed-nodes' there, which AFAICT we don't use in our
web interface but maybe some API users?

To be fair, these users should also check whether there are any
elements in the array to be safe, but it might be less churn to make it
a ref + array ref check for both API endpoints here?

>              next if $ns->{$node} ne 'online';
>  
>              for my $csid (sort keys %$separate) {



_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel