From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF9151FF0B7 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2026 11:56:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CDA4C21603; Fri, 30 Oct 2026 11:56:15 +0100 (CET) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2026 11:56:12 +0100 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH qemu-server v2 3/7] api: clone disk: downgrade failure to register unused volume to warning From: "Elias Huhsovitz" To: "Fiona Ebner" , X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.0 References: <20261029120811.107814-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> <20261029120811.107814-4-f.ebner@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20261029120811.107814-4-f.ebner@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1793357772226 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.471 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_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium 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: 67TAN72E3GGC3LYOIUXPSKBXSTVUUY7M X-Message-ID-Hash: 67TAN72E3GGC3LYOIUXPSKBXSTVUUY7M X-MailFrom: e.huhsovitz@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: I like the approach. I was also considering to simply check the number of slots used before the actual cloning of the disk, but then we might just encounter a new edge case down the line... So IMO this solution is better :D Reviewed-by: Elias Huhsovitz On Thu Oct 29, 2026 at 1:06 PM CET, Fiona Ebner wrote: > When reaching the call to register the source volume as unused after > clone, a running VM will already be switched over to the new disk. If > an error occurs there (because all unused slots are already in use), > the new disk would be removed in the error handling. Even if it is an > offline clone, the failure to register the source volume as unused > should not lead to aborting/reversing the whole operation. Downgrade > the error to a warning. > > Reported-by: Elias Huhsovitz > Signed-off-by: Fiona Ebner > --- > > New in v2. > > src/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm | 8 ++++++-- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm b/src/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm > index ebbfcb1b..9540db86 100644 > --- a/src/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm > +++ b/src/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm > @@ -5012,8 +5012,12 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({ > $conf->{$disk} =3D PVE::QemuServer::print_drive($newdriv= e); > =20 > if (!$param->{delete}) { > - my $unused_key =3D PVE::QemuConfig->add_unused_volum= e($conf, $old_volid); > - print("adding source volume '$old_volid' as '$unused= _key' to config\n"); > + eval { > + my $unused_key =3D PVE::QemuConfig->add_unused_v= olume($conf, $old_volid); > + print("adding source volume '$old_volid' as '$un= used_key' to config\n"); > + }; > + log_warn("cannot add source volume '$old_volid' as u= nused to config - $@") > + if $@; > } > =20 > # convert moved disk to base if part of template