RE: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/1] Fix pool create when pool already exists

["Henrik Persson E" <henrik e persson ericsson com>]

Hi,

Believe it is my bad. Didn't check this case when I fixed the problem related to pools that were not correctly cleaned up when the create failed.

/Henrik

-----Original Message-----
From: libvir-list-bounces redhat com on behalf of Dave Allan
Sent: Wed 2009-07-01 16:02
To: Daniel P. Berrange
Cc: libvirt-list redhat com
Subject: Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 0/1] Fix pool create when pool already exists
 
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 11:02:08AM +0200, Daniel Veillard wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 04:22:37PM -0400, David Allan wrote:
>>> When storagePoolCreate is called to define a pool that already exists, it mistakenly destroys the existing pool.  This patch fixes the problem.  
>>   Hum, I tried to assert the level of damage this bug generates and
>> I have been surprized by the following:
>>
>> virsh # pool-create /tmp/pool.xml
>> Pool testpool created from /tmp/pool.xml
>>
>> virsh # pool-list
>> Name                 State      Autostart
>> -----------------------------------------
>> testpool             active     no
>>
>> virsh # pool-create /tmp/pool.xml
>> error: Failed to create pool from /tmp/pool.xml
>> error: internal error storage pool already exists
>>
>> virsh # pool-list
>> Name                 State      Autostart
>> -----------------------------------------
>> testpool             active     no
>>
>> virsh #
>>
>>   I.e. on an unpatched libvirtd, I can hit the error, but the pool still
>> shows up, so I'm wondering what's the effect of the 
>>   virStoragePoolObjRemove(&driver->pools, pool);
>> that we are avoiding here... it should remove the pool from the list,
>> but I'm not seeing this, so I'm a bit puzzled...
> 
> What version of libvirt are you running ?  This bug was fairly 
> recently introduced - it doesn't hit F11 libvirt, but does hit
> current CVS when I try your steps. (ie 'testpool' disappears)

Yes, it went in 2009-06-22, so it would have to be very recent code to 
hit it, and it does happen 100% of the time.

Dave

--
Libvir-list mailing list
Libvir-list redhat com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list