From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D3C01FF13B for ; Wed, 20 May 2026 10:08:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D915B1C0F5; Wed, 20 May 2026 10:08:21 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Wed, 20 May 2026 10:07:48 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Re: applied: [PATCH-SERIES ha-manager 0/2] make idle LRMs resolve leftover moving HA resources while disarmed From: "Daniel Kral" To: "Thomas Lamprecht" , X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0-136-gdb9fe9896a79-dirty References: <20260519143842.382324-1-d.kral@proxmox.com> <177922102935.2532338.3573199123091614034.b4-ty@b4> In-Reply-To: <177922102935.2532338.3573199123091614034.b4-ty@b4> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1779264453147 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.075 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 Message-ID-Hash: RMAIZHPV5IP2SB4KJ6AHSUQ3GV5NJXF7 X-Message-ID-Hash: RMAIZHPV5IP2SB4KJ6AHSUQ3GV5NJXF7 X-MailFrom: d.kral@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 List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue May 19, 2026 at 10:11 PM CEST, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > On Tue, 19 May 2026 16:38:34 +0200, Daniel Kral wrote: >> As in patch message #2: >>=20 >> If there are HA resources, which are in transient states that defer the >> disarming process, but their LRMs are already in idle state and disarmed >> mode, these LRMs will not properly resolve the transient states of these >> HA resources as assumed by the HA Manager. >>=20 >> [...] > > Applied, thanks! > > Squashed Fiona's naming nits (disarm_deferring) into 2/2, added a contrac= t doc > on the new Tools helper, and dropped the unused $target_node destructurin= g and > !$current_node guard while at it. Thanks! I started out also making disarmed LRMs active if an HA resource's $target_node eq $node, but this wasn't required as the successful migration is already confirmed by the $sd->{node} entry alone, which is gathered from the pmxcfs itself, so no need to make the receiving LRM active for that. The !$current_node guard might still be worth (see my reply to Fiona's review on patch 2/2) to be defensive against some edge cases. > > As I looked into this too a bit, and seemingly went for a different angle= , I > added a follow-up to also freeze non-deferred services on the deferred cy= cle, > otherwise any LRM restart in the meantime (apt upgrade, manual restart) h= angs > in 'restart' mode waiting for an active_service_count going to zero that = due to > the deferred-mode CRM won't happen. Thanks for the follow-ups and good catch that the frozen HA resources are also accounted for the {basic,static} load accounting, good to have a test cases for that! I'll also take more care to test with the other shutdown modes in production! > > Bumped to 5.2.4. > > [1/2] test: add disarm test cases for idle lrms with transient ha resourc= es > commit: 54497ae43d5bdb3842eb6f32e0642da9deb7cf5b > [2/2] make idle LRMs resolve leftover moving HA resources while disarmed > commit: 9917559d01e60cc55622102bef2b8f5d87892d33