On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 08:40:49PM -0500, John Ferlan wrote:
During processing of the extents found in a pool, we have historically ignored the thin-pool which means any thin lv found in the pool would also be ignored. This can start to change now - we can save aside the name and capacity of any thin-pool's found so that we can use that when we find a thin lv and fill in the thin-pool capacity value on output.
The result will end up being the following for a vol-dumpxml:
<source> <thinpool name='thinmints'/> <capacity unit='bytes'>20971520</capacity> </thinpool> </source>
Volume XML should contain information about the volume. Putting the pool capacity there feels unnatural and out of place.
instead of an empty <source> </source> pair.
An upcoming patch will allow a thin lv to be seen
Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jferlan@redhat.com> --- src/conf/storage_conf.h | 12 +++++++++ src/storage/storage_backend_logical.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/storage/storage_backend_logical.c b/src/storage/storage_backend_logical.c index 3044853..d7990e2 100644 --- a/src/storage/storage_backend_logical.c +++ b/src/storage/storage_backend_logical.c @@ -72,6 +72,8 @@ virStorageBackendLogicalSetActive(virStoragePoolObjPtr pool, struct virStorageBackendLogicalPoolVolData { virStoragePoolObjPtr pool; virStorageVolDefPtr vol; + size_t nthinpools; + virStorageVolSourceThinPoolPtr thinpools;
This is literally a list of pools in the pool.
};
static int
@@ -410,9 +441,25 @@ virStorageBackendLogicalFindLVs(virStoragePoolObjPtr pool, "lvs") < 0) goto cleanup;
+ /* If we find some thin-pools during processing, let's see if we + * need information from them for any thin lv's in the pool + */ + for (i = 0; i < cbdata.nthinpools; i++) { + for (j = 0; j < pool->volumes.count; j++) { + if (STREQ_NULLABLE(pool->volumes.objs[j]->source.thin_pool, + cbdata.thinpools[i].name)) { + pool->volumes.objs[j]->source.thin_capacity = + cbdata.thinpools[i].capacity; + } + } + } +
This information should be stored in one place, not n+1 places. Jan