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 576571FF15C
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:35:39 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9940F294A1;
	Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:35:34 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <b19c2d97-887d-4733-860e-4dacbf90a6c8@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:35:32 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Daniel Kral <d.kral@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20240916163839.236908-1-d.kral@proxmox.com>
 <20240916163839.236908-4-d.kral@proxmox.com>
 <97e9a3eb-0a4c-4fe1-90e9-8f9b2cb78fa7@proxmox.com>
 <396f29b5-f9f3-47d7-bcf4-6e52c94c60c4@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <396f29b5-f9f3-47d7-bcf4-6e52c94c60c4@proxmox.com>
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.049 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] [RFC qemu-server 3/9] fix #5284: move_vm: add check
 if target storage supports vm images
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>

Am 22.01.25 um 14:18 schrieb Daniel Kral:
> On 11/29/24 15:23, Fiona Ebner wrote:
>> Am 16.09.24 um 18:38 schrieb Daniel Kral:
>>> +=head3 check_volume_alloc($storecfg, $storeid, $node)
>>> +
>>> +Checks whether the volume with the identifier C<$volid>, that is
>>> defined in C<$storecfg> (which
>>> +is typically retrieved with L<PVE::Storage::config>), is enabled an
>>> supports volume images.
>>> +
>>> +If the check fails, it will C<die> with an error message.
>>> +
>>> +Returns C<1> if the check is successful.
>>> +
>>> +=cut
>>> +
>>> +sub check_volume_alloc : prototype($$;$) {
>>
>> Again, "assert_" and "_permission"
> 
> Hm, why did you choose permission here?
> 
> There are no permission checks done here, would be a suffix like
> "_allowed" or "_available" also be fine for you?

I was thinking about permissions in a more general sense than our
permission system, but sure, more precise language is better :)



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