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 BEB358009A for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 12:12:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B3E9816501 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 12:12:47 +0100 (CET) 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 id 4A7EB164F6 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 12:12:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1915C43B94 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 12:12:47 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 12:12:46 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:95.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/95.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE development discussion , =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=c3=bcnbichler?= References: <20211116105215.1812508-1-f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20211116105215.1812508-1-f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.838 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 -1.446 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 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [qemuserver.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server] migrate: skip tpmstate for NBD migration 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: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 11:12:47 -0000 On 16.11.21 11:52, Fabian Gr=C3=BCnbichler wrote: > the tpmstate volume is not available in the VM directly, but we do > migrate the state volume via a storage migration anyway if necessary. >=20 some context would be great to have in the commit message, iow. mentionin= g that QEMU is already migrating this as part of its memory/state migration= =2E Also, how is "migrate -> stop -> start" affected, is the TPM synced out t= o the (previously replicated?) disk on the target side during stop? > this code path was only triggered for replicated VMs with TPM. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Fabian Gr=C3=BCnbichler > --- > PVE/QemuServer.pm | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >=20 > diff --git a/PVE/QemuServer.pm b/PVE/QemuServer.pm > index 580af9e..76d45a2 100644 > --- a/PVE/QemuServer.pm > +++ b/PVE/QemuServer.pm > @@ -5238,6 +5238,7 @@ sub vm_migrate_get_nbd_disks { > my ($ds, $drive) =3D @_; > =20 > return if drive_is_cdrom($drive); > + return if $ds eq 'tpmstate0'; > =20 > my $volid =3D $drive->{file}; > =20 >=20