Volume types associated with cinder volumes getting deleted.

Bug #1174268 reported by Shanthakumar K
18
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Cinder
Invalid
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

Hi,

I have created the volume type of name "LVM" and associated the same with one volume_backend_name = LVM_iSCSI.

I have created the volume with volume type with lvm and its listed with "cinder volumes"

When I try to delete the volume type of LVm which is associated with one of the cinder volumes getting deleted without any warnings and cinder list shows the volume with "volume type -id"

Bug can be reproduce able:
1. create a volume type
2.Associated the volume backend with volumetype
3.create the volume with above create volume type
4. delete the volume type created above

Revision history for this message
John Griffith (john-griffith) wrote :

I'm not sure what you expected the behavior to be here? I admit it does seem a bit odd that we replace the name with the UUID when you delete it (TBH the type should be set as uuid to begin with IMO).

However the type is in fact deleted as is shown by the type-list and also can be seen by investigating the database (deleted is set to 1).

I guess you're suggesting that we shouldn't be able to delete a volume-type when a volume of that type exists? I'm not sure I have a problem with that given that the volume_type create/delete is an admin command and they may wish to discontinue use of said type for some reason.

Changed in cinder:
status: New → Invalid
Revision history for this message
Shanthakumar K (shantha-kumar) wrote :

Thanks for your response.

In multibackend driver model, volume type is associated with "volume_backend_name" and volume_backend_name is responsible for redirecting the create request to particluar storage array.

 Volume is created with parameter of volume_backend_type and volume_type. once you delete the volume-type, associated volume_backend_name also getting deleted.

You can check with "cinder extra-specs-list" command

How this can be invaild ?

Revision history for this message
Thierry Carrez (ttx) wrote :

I'll let John decide on the validity, but this doesn't seem to be an exploitable security issue, so i'll make it public.

information type: Private Security → Public
Revision history for this message
Shanthakumar K (shantha-kumar) wrote :

Kindly update the defect status

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Duplicates of this bug

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.