On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 11:34:15PM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote: > Hey guys, > > Just looking at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=924672 and > looks like all we need to do is ignore thin pools and thin pool data > devices. With some trivial testing this seems to work fine (i.e. > failed before and works now). > > > diff --git a/src/storage/storage_backend_logical.c > b/src/storage/storage_backend_logical.c > index a1a37a1..0154256 100644 > --- a/src/storage/storage_backend_logical.c > +++ b/src/storage/storage_backend_logical.c > @@ -85,6 +85,10 @@ virStorageBackendLogicalMakeVol(virStoragePoolObjPtr pool, > if (attrs[4] != 'a') > return 0; > > + /* Skip thin pools(t) and thin pool data(T) */ > + if (attrs[0] == 't' || attrs[0] == 'T') > + return 0; > + > /* See if we're only looking for a specific volume */ > if (data != NULL) { > vol = data; > > I'm sure the fix isn't this trivial but i can finish it up and submit > an official patch (through git) if this is close. Do we really want to hide thin volumes. Unless i'm missing something in my understanding of LVM, we should expose these as storage pool volumes in the same way as thick provisioned volumes. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list