[nova][cinder] What should the behaviour of extend_volume be with attached encrypted volumes?

Lee Yarwood lyarwood at redhat.com
Tue Feb 18 11:06:58 UTC 2020

On 13-02-20 09:51:02, Lee Yarwood wrote:
> Hello all,
> The following bug was raised recently regarding a failure to extend
> attached encrypted volumes:
> Failing to extend an attached encrypted volume
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1861071
> I've worked up a series below that resolves this for LUKSv1 volumes by
> taking the LUKSv1 header into account before calling Libvirt to resize
> the block device within the instance:
> https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:bug/1861071
> This results in the instance visable block device being resized to a
> size just smaller than that requested through Cinder's API.
> My question to the list is if that behaviour is acceptable given the
> same call to extend an attached unencrypted volume *will* grow the
> instance visable block device to the requested size?

Bumping the thread as I'm still looking for input. The above topic is
ready for review now so if I don't hear any objections I'll move forward
with the current approach of making the user visible block device
smaller within the instance.


Lee Yarwood                 A5D1 9385 88CB 7E5F BE64  6618 BCA6 6E33 F672 2D76
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20200218/a38c7f7b/attachment.sig>

More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list