GeezerVison

The World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory.

GeezerVison is showing github.com — server: encrypt a volume created on a storage pool with an encrypted disk offering by weizhouapache · Pull Request #14667 · apache/cloudstack

Conversation

weizhouapache commented Nov 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Member

Description

A volume created with a storageid is created on the pool right away, without the passphrase or the KMS key which an encrypted disk offering needs, so it was created without encryption. Set up its encryption before it is created.

Types of changes

Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
Build/CI
Test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Major
Minor

Bug Severity

BLOCKER
Critical
Major
Minor
Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

Environment: Trillian test env pr147-n88 (Ubuntu 26.04, KVM, two management servers, two KVM hosts, Ceph RBD primary pools ceph-pri1 and ceph-pri2, plus an NFS primary pool). The management servers ran a 4.23 build with the same change, not this 4.22 branch. The KVM agents were not changed.

Steps: create an encrypted disk offering (encrypt=true), then create a volume from it with an explicit storageid on each pool. The volumes were not attached to a VM.

Pool	Type	`passphrase_id` in DB	`encrypt_format` in DB	On disk
nfs-n88	NetworkFilesystem	set (363)	luks	qcow2 with LUKS: `qemu-img info` reports `encrypted: yes`
ceph-pri1	RBD	set (364)	luks2	image starts with a LUKS2 header
ceph-pri2	RBD	set (365)	luks2	image starts with a LUKS2 header

Not covered by these tests:

Attaching or detaching the encrypted volume to a running VM.
SharedMountPoint pools.
The pre-fix behaviour on the same environment. The passphrase was set on all three pools with the change applied, but the bug was not reproduced before the change.
A build or test run of this 4.22 branch.

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

Not yet tested beyond the cases above.

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

All reactions


          server: encrypt a volume created on a storage pool with an encrypted …

e5a3cd8

…disk offering

A volume created with a storageid is created on the pool right away, without the passphrase or the KMS key which an encrypted disk offering needs, so it was created without encryption. Set up its encryption before it is created.

boring-cyborg Bot added component:orchestration component:storage labels

Nov 10, 2026

weizhouapache linked an issue

Nov 10, 2026

that may be closed by this pull request

[KVM] Encrypted disk offering: volume created on a manually selected primary storage pool (NFS and SharedMountPoint) is not encrypted (no LUKS, no error) #14662

Open

weizhouapache mentioned this pull request

Nov 10, 2026

[KVM] Encrypted volume on SharedMountPoint pool is created without LUKS and attach fails with "No encryption in image header" #14663

Open

weizhouapache removed a link to an issue

Nov 10, 2026

[KVM] Encrypted disk offering: volume created on a manually selected primary storage pool (NFS and SharedMountPoint) is not encrypted (no LUKS, no error) #14662

Open

weizhouapache linked an issue

Nov 10, 2026

that may be closed by this pull request

[KVM] Encrypted volume on SharedMountPoint pool is created without LUKS and attach fails with "No encryption in image header" #14663

Open

codecov Bot commented Nov 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 7 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 18.31%. Comparing base (b56bbc2) to head (e5a3cd8).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...stack/engine/orchestration/VolumeOrchestrator.java	0.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
...n/java/com/cloud/storage/VolumeApiServiceImpl.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               4.22   #14667      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     18.32%   18.31%   -0.01%     
+ Complexity    16644    16642       -2     
============================================
  Files          5939     5939              
  Lines        537787   537794       +7     
  Branches      65932    65932              
============================================
- Hits          98544    98511      -33     
- Misses       428033   428079      +46     
+ Partials      11210    11204       -6

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	`4.08% <ø> (ø)`
unittests	`19.40% <0.00%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

This was referenced Nov 11, 2026

NAS backup: support incremental backups of RBD volumes #14386

Open

[WIP] Ceph improvements shapeblue/cloudstack#147

Draft

weizhouapache marked this pull request as ready for review

November 11, 2026 15:02

weizhouapache commented Nov 11, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Member Author

@blueorangutan package

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

blueorangutan commented Nov 11, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

@weizhouapache a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

blueorangutan commented Nov 11, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 19996

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request

Nov 11, 2026

[KVM] Encrypted disk offering: volume created on a manually selected primary storage pool (NFS and SharedMountPoint) is not encrypted (no LUKS, no error) #14662

Open

weizhouapache linked an issue

Nov 12, 2026

that may be closed by this pull request

[KVM] Encrypted disk offering: volume created on a manually selected primary storage pool (NFS and SharedMountPoint) is not encrypted (no LUKS, no error) #14662

Open

weizhouapache removed a link to an issue

Nov 12, 2026

[KVM] Encrypted volume on SharedMountPoint pool is created without LUKS and attach fails with "No encryption in image header" #14663

Open

weizhouapache commented

Nov 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread

...chestration/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/engine/orchestration/VolumeOrchestrator.java

		return;
		}
		VolumeVO volume = _volsDao.findById(volumeId);
		setPassphraseForVolumeEncryption(volume);

weizhouapache Nov 12, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Member Author

There was a problem hiding this comment.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

for main/24, this line should be

setPassphraseForVolumeEncryption(volume, getKmsKeyFromVolume(volume), volume.getAccountId());

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

All reactions

weizhouapache commented Nov 12, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Member Author

@blueorangutan test

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

blueorangutan commented Nov 12, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

@weizhouapache a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments

Reviewers

No reviews

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

component:orchestration component:storage

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[KVM] Encrypted disk offering: volume created on a manually selected primary storage pool (NFS and SharedMountPoint) is not encrypted (no LUKS, no error)

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

2 participants

Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.

You are visitor 01402520 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up.
Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required.

GeezerVison

Conversation

weizhouapache commented Nov 10, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

Types of changes

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Bug Severity

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Nov 10, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Nov 11, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Nov 11, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Nov 11, 2026

Uh oh!

weizhouapache Nov 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Nov 12, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Nov 12, 2026

Uh oh!

This branch has not been deployed

Reviewers

Uh oh!

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

weizhouapache commented Nov 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

codecov Bot commented Nov 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.