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 [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBC521FF141
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Tue, 30 Jun 2026 14:20:44 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id DF07621419;
	Tue, 30 Jun 2026 14:20:42 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <c78eaa9f-1f0b-4953-8c20-a498a970de48@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2026 14:20:07 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH storage v7 2/4] fix #7339: lvm: add discard action for
 removed volumes
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
To: Lukas Sichert <l.sichert@proxmox.com>, pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
References: <20260616101323.24981-1-l.sichert@proxmox.com>
 <20260616101323.24981-3-l.sichert@proxmox.com>
 <777e92d5-3d3e-4daf-8e2b-2061d931ef4e@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <777e92d5-3d3e-4daf-8e2b-2061d931ef4e@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2
X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1782821995873
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
	DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
	KAM_DMARC_STATUS         0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict
 Alignment (newer systems)
	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: MBV3GBK2COU5RELNNM3J5NSRL7QLWCIS
X-Message-ID-Hash: MBV3GBK2COU5RELNNM3J5NSRL7QLWCIS
X-MailFrom: f.ebner@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>

Am 30.06.26 um 2:15 PM schrieb Fiona Ebner:
> Am 16.06.26 um 12:13 PM schrieb Lukas Sichert:
>> @@ -373,6 +381,14 @@ my sub free_lvm_volumes_locked {
>>                          die "short syswrite: wrote $written of $stepsize bytes\n";
>>                      }
>>                  }
>> +                if ($on_remove_opts->{discard}) {
>> +                    eval {
>> +                        blockdev_ioctl_range($fh, 'BLKDISCARD', BLKDISCARD, $offset, $stepsize);
>> +                    };
>> +                    if ($@) {
>> +                        log_warn("blkdiscard failed: $@");
> 
> Similar to the last patch, I would log the offset and length for
> completeness. I also wonder if we should

Oh, and I wonder if we should really log it for every failure
independently. Maybe just the first one and then count and log how many
operations failed in total? Depending on the scenario, it might be a
huge number of messages.

Together with checking for actual support first like Michael suggested.