fix: RAID volume pre cleanup #169
Conversation
japokorn
commented
Sep 22, 2020
japokorn
commented
- raid volumes now remove existing data from member disks as needed before creation
|
Fixes #163 |
|
is there a test? |
library/blivet.py
Outdated
| @@ -611,6 +611,11 @@ def _create(self): | |||
| if safe_mode: | |||
| raise BlivetAnsibleError("cannot create new RAID in safe mode") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I can't comment on the change itself, but this line above does not look right. Does it mean that every RAID creation is considered unsafe and users must set safe_mode off for it to be allowed, even if the RAID is to be created on an empty disk set?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fixed. Thanks for noticing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We must not fall into the opposite problem of allowing to destroy existing data in safe mode though. See #168 .
japokorn
force-pushed
the
master-raid_disks_cleanup
branch
from
571f773
to
84e8553
Compare
japokorn
force-pushed
the
master-raid_disks_cleanup
branch
2 times, most recently
from
f88efba
to
6c990b1
Compare
| raise BlivetAnsibleError("cannot create new RAID in safe mode") | ||
| for spec in self._volume["disks"]: | ||
| disk = self._blivet.devicetree.resolve_device(spec) | ||
| if not disk.isleaf or disk.format.type is not None: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The check for safe_mode has to be a bit more careful, like the ones in BlivetVolume._reformat and BlivetBase._manage_one_encryption. I see that BlivetPool._create_members also needs to check for device.original_format.name != get_format(None).name (to catch formatting reported by blkid but not recognized/handled by blivet).
japokorn
force-pushed
the
master-raid_disks_cleanup
branch
from
6c990b1
to
9a701b7
Compare
|
[citest pending] |
|
[citest bad] |
|
[citest pending] |
japokorn
force-pushed
the
master-raid_disks_cleanup
branch
from
9a701b7
to
5c2ee87
Compare
|
Rebased. This should fix the issue with failing test. |
|
[citest bad] |
|
[citest pending] |
|
Do we still need this? |
|
[citest pending] |
2 similar comments
|
[citest pending] |
|
[citest pending] |
|
[citest bad] |
japokorn
force-pushed
the
master-raid_disks_cleanup
branch
from
5c2ee87
to
39e5e8d
Compare
|
[citest pending] |
|
[citest] |
japokorn
force-pushed
the
master-raid_disks_cleanup
branch
from
39e5e8d
to
fa9e7f1
Compare
|
[citest bad] |
japokorn
force-pushed
the
master-raid_disks_cleanup
branch
from
fa9e7f1
to
5ca1593
Compare
Codecov ReportPatch coverage has no change and project coverage change:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #169 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 13.70% 13.67% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 8 8
Lines 1729 1733 +4
Branches 71 79 +8
==========================================
Hits 237 237
- Misses 1492 1496 +4
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
japokorn
force-pushed
the
master-raid_disks_cleanup
branch
from
5ca1593
to
f89f484
Compare
tests/tests_raid_volume_cleanup.yml
Outdated
| @@ -0,0 +1,105 @@ | |||
| --- | |||
| - hosts: all | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| - hosts: all | |
| - name: Test RAID cleanup | |
| hosts: all |
tests/tests_raid_volume_cleanup.yml
Outdated
| volume2_size: '4g' | ||
|
|
||
| tasks: | ||
| - include_role: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| - include_role: | |
| - name: Call the storage role | |
| include_role: |
tests/tests_raid_volume_cleanup.yml
Outdated
| - packages_installed | ||
| - service_facts | ||
|
|
||
| - include_tasks: get_unused_disk.yml |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| - include_tasks: get_unused_disk.yml | |
| - name: Get unused disks | |
| include_tasks: get_unused_disk.yml |
tests/tests_raid_volume_cleanup.yml
Outdated
| set_fact: | ||
| storage_safe_mode: true | ||
|
|
||
| - name: Try to overwrite existing device with raid volume and safe mode on (expect failure) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| - name: Try to overwrite existing device with raid volume and safe mode on (expect failure) | |
| - name: >- | |
| Try to overwrite existing device with raid volume and safe mode on | |
| (expect failure) |
tests/tests_raid_volume_cleanup.yml
Outdated
| mount_point: "{{ mount_location1 }}" | ||
| state: present | ||
|
|
||
| - name: unreachable task |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| - name: unreachable task | |
| - name: Unreachable task |
tests/tests_raid_volume_cleanup.yml
Outdated
|
|
||
| - name: Try to overwrite existing device with raid volume and safe mode on (expect failure) | ||
| block: | ||
| - name: Create a RAID0 device mounted on "{{ mount_location1 }}" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For checking that the role raises an error, and that the error message is the one that you expect, please consider using verify-role-failed.yml as in https://github.com/linux-system-roles/storage/blob/main/tests/tests_misc.yml#L66
One of the issues we have had in the past with testing for storage role failures was that the role would fail in the wrong way i.e. because the inputs were not correct, or there was some other blivet error, but the test would report that the role failed correctly because it was not checking for the error message - using verify-role-failed.yml makes it easy to verify that the role failed AND that the error message is the correct one for the failure condition.
tests/tests_raid_volume_cleanup.yml
Outdated
| disks: "{{ unused_disks }}" | ||
| mount_point: "{{ mount_location1 }}" | ||
| state: absent | ||
|
|
japokorn
force-pushed
the
master-raid_disks_cleanup
branch
2 times, most recently
from
e944a6b
to
19af7d8
Compare
Cause: Existing data were not removed from member disks before RAID volume creation. Fix: RAID volumes now remove existing data from member disks as needed before creation. Signed-off by: Jan Pokorny <[email protected]>
japokorn
force-pushed
the
master-raid_disks_cleanup
branch
from
19af7d8
to
5540499
Compare
|
testing now |
