From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E16C01FF13A
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Wed, 22 Jul 2026 15:12:34 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 59EB1214E0;
	Wed, 22 Jul 2026 15:12:34 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 15:11:59 +0200
Message-Id: <DK54JCSS2HU1.14PDCQ5Q6LYFM@proxmox.com>
To: "Fiona Ebner" <f.ebner@proxmox.com>, <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 <d.kral@proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH qemu-server v2 2/2] fix #7828: avoid parsing absolute
 paths as volume ids
From: "Thomas Ellmenreich" <t.ellmenreich@proxmox.com>
X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.0
References: <20260722095251.89606-1-t.ellmenreich@proxmox.com>
 <20260722095251.89606-3-t.ellmenreich@proxmox.com>
 <8abb29af-e16d-456b-ab14-cd423abdd801@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <8abb29af-e16d-456b-ab14-cd423abdd801@proxmox.com>
X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2
X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1784725892301
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
	AWL                     0.119 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From:
 address
	DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
	KAM_DMARC_STATUS         0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict
 Alignment (newer systems)
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW        -0.7 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
 low trust
	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: 6XQJMAIPYYIAOSSDT55VMUVUODC7PLJ6
X-Message-ID-Hash: 6XQJMAIPYYIAOSSDT55VMUVUODC7PLJ6
X-MailFrom: t.ellmenreich@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 <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:pve-devel-owner@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:pve-devel-join@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pve-devel-leave@lists.proxmox.com>

> To fix the regression, I would prefer to use the noerr variant of
> parse_volume_id() here, because that is what tells us whether the volume
> is PVE-managed or not. We already do that in some other places like
> import. And then continue only if we got a result for $storeid.

That sounds like a better solution for me, what do you think @Daniel?