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 E84F58BE61 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 09:40:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C62237B0E for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 09:40:03 +0200 (CEST) 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 ; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 09:40:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D6E9944C2F for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 09:40:01 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 09:40:00 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:107.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/107.0 Content-Language: en-GB To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Fiona Ebner References: <20221027081324.55998-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20221027081324.55998-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.034 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 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] [PATCH v2 qemu] init: daemonize: defuse PID file resolve error to warning 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: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 07:40:04 -0000 On 27/10/2022 10:13, Fiona Ebner wrote: > When proxmox-file-restore invokes QEMU, the PID file is a (temporary) > file that's already unlinked, so resolving the absolute path here > failed. > > It should not be a critical error when the PID file unlink handler > can't be registered, because the path can't be resolved for whatever > reason. Just turn it into a warning instead. thx for the patch! > > Reported-by: Dominik Csapak > Suggested-by: Thomas Lamprecht > Signed-off-by: Fiona Ebner > --- > > Changes from v1: > * Added R-b and S-b tags. > > softmmu/vl.c | 7 +++---- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/softmmu/vl.c b/softmmu/vl.c > index 0d233d55f3..1fa992ab09 100644 > --- a/softmmu/vl.c > +++ b/softmmu/vl.c > @@ -2445,10 +2445,9 @@ static void qemu_maybe_daemonize(const char *pid_file) > > pid_file_realpath = g_malloc0(PATH_MAX); > if (!realpath(pid_file, pid_file_realpath)) { > - error_report("cannot resolve PID file path: %s: %s", > - pid_file, strerror(errno)); > - unlink(pid_file); > - exit(1); > + warn_report("not removing PID file on exit: cannot resolve path: " > + "%s: %s", pid_file, strerror(errno)); As my reply to the upstream patch at Daniel's query w.r.t. to warn, I'd also like to drop the warning here, at least for ENOENT, which would cover our, and IMO most other, use cases. > + return; > } > > qemu_unlink_pidfile_notifier = (struct UnlinkPidfileNotifier) {