On 15-10-15 10:44, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 10:28:39AM +0200, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>> When a RBD volume has snapshots it can not be removed.
>>
>> This patch introduces a new flag to force volume removal,
>> VIR_STORAGE_VOL_DELETE_FORCED.
>>
>> With this flag any existing snapshots will be removed prior
>> to removing the volume.
>>
>> No existing mechanism in libvirt allowed us to pass such information,
>> so that's why a new flag was introduced.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wido den Hollander <wido@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> include/libvirt/libvirt-storage.h | 1 +
>> src/storage/storage_backend_rbd.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 59 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/libvirt/libvirt-storage.h b/include/libvirt/libvirt-storage.h
>> index 453089e..36ff979 100644
>> --- a/include/libvirt/libvirt-storage.h
>> +++ b/include/libvirt/libvirt-storage.h
>> @@ -115,6 +115,7 @@ typedef enum {
>> typedef enum {
>> VIR_STORAGE_VOL_DELETE_NORMAL = 0, /* Delete metadata only (fast) */
>> VIR_STORAGE_VOL_DELETE_ZEROED = 1 << 0, /* Clear all data to zeros (slow) */
>> + VIR_STORAGE_VOL_DELETE_FORCED = 2, /* Force removal of volume, even if in use */
>
> Long term I could imagine there will be a number of reasons why
> it might be forbidden to delete a volume by default. It would be
> nice to selectively override these reasons. FORCED is quite a
> generic name for a specific action. So how about naming it
> VOL_DELETE_WITH_SNAPSHOTS
>
Seems like a good thing to me. Want me to submit a new patch?
Before I do so, any code-wide objections?
Wido
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
>
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list