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 609B771F44 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 09:12:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 56ACF2EFFE for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 09:11:37 +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 id 31FB92EFEE for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 09:11:36 +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 03B80457C2 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 09:11:36 +0200 (CEST) To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20210928114001.164081-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> <20210928114001.164081-7-f.ebner@proxmox.com> From: Fabian Ebner Message-ID: Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2021 09:11:35 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 1.277 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 -1.964 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. [disks.pm, diskmanage.pm] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH storage 06/10] api: disks: initgpt: explicitly abort for partitions 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: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 07:12:07 -0000 Am 30.09.21 um 18:02 schrieb Thomas Lamprecht: > On 28.09.21 13:39, Fabian Ebner wrote: >> In preparation to extend disk_is_used to support partitions. Without >> this new check, initgpt would also allow partitions once disk_is_used >> supports partitions, which is not desirable. >> >> Signed-off-by: Fabian Ebner >> --- >> PVE/API2/Disks.pm | 1 + >> PVE/Diskmanage.pm | 10 ++++++++-- >> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/PVE/API2/Disks.pm b/PVE/API2/Disks.pm >> index 96c19fd..25c9ded 100644 >> --- a/PVE/API2/Disks.pm >> +++ b/PVE/API2/Disks.pm >> @@ -260,6 +260,7 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method ({ >> >> my $authuser = $rpcenv->get_user(); >> >> + die "$disk is a partition\n" if PVE::Diskmanage::is_partition($disk); >> die "disk $disk already in use\n" if PVE::Diskmanage::disk_is_used($disk); >> my $worker = sub { >> PVE::Diskmanage::init_disk($disk, $param->{uuid}); >> diff --git a/PVE/Diskmanage.pm b/PVE/Diskmanage.pm >> index 7aad707..73cbb8b 100644 >> --- a/PVE/Diskmanage.pm >> +++ b/PVE/Diskmanage.pm >> @@ -57,8 +57,8 @@ sub init_disk { >> >> assert_blockdev($disk); >> >> - # we should already have checked if it is in use in the api call >> - # but we check again for safety >> + # we should already have checked these in the api call, but we check again for safety >> + die "$disk is a partition\n" if is_partition($disk); >> die "disk $disk is already in use\n" if disk_is_used($disk); >> >> my $id = $uuid || 'R'; >> @@ -798,6 +798,12 @@ sub get_blockdev { >> return $block_dev; >> } >> >> +sub is_partition { >> + my ($dev_path) = @_; >> + >> + return defined(eval { get_partnum($dev_path) }); >> +} >> + > > you add `is_partition` here but use it already in patch 04/10, can we reorder that? > Or maybe squash in the addition into 03/10? > Sorry about that. I think I had the condition inlined in 04/10 at first and forgot to re-order after I introduced and switched to the helper. I'll send a v2 and squash the addition into 03/10. >> sub locked_disk_action { >> my ($sub) = @_; >> my $res = PVE::Tools::lock_file('/run/lock/pve-diskmanage.lck', undef, $sub); >> >