Fix clone to filesystem PVC sizing when storageProfile minimum applies by arnongilboa · Pull Request #4098 · kubevirt/containerized-data-importer

arnongilboa · 2026-04-20T13:46:33Z

What this PR does / why we need it:
When cloning to filesystem, apply the storageProfile effective volume size (minimum supported PVC size) before inflating with filesystem overhead. It helps on cloning from block to filesystem where both have minimum supported size but the target also needs filesystem overhead on top of that, otherwise the pre-clone checks fail.

jira-ticket: https://redhat.atlassian.net/browse/CNV-79503

Release note:

Fix clone to filesystem PVC sizing when storageProfile minimum applies

kubevirt-bot · 2026-04-20T13:46:38Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign aglitke for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

coveralls · 2026-04-20T14:00:45Z

coverage: 49.611% (+0.03%) from 49.581% — arnongilboa:clone_to_file_min_size_fix into kubevirt:main

Acedus · 2026-04-20T14:45:59Z

fyi @arnongilboa #3901

Acedus · 2026-04-20T14:46:03Z

/cc @akalenyu

arnongilboa · 2026-04-23T07:24:46Z

/hold

arnongilboa · 2026-05-14T15:27:33Z

/hold

arnongilboa · 2026-05-18T13:56:53Z

/unhold

noamasu

thanks! for clone to fs, make sense to to add fsoverhead after effective size.
added some comments

noamasu · 2026-05-19T08:59:51Z

 			Entry("[test_id:12423] empty", "", false),
 		)

+		It("[test_id:XXXXX] Block volumeMode clone to filesystem, using storageProfile with minPvcSize annotation", Serial, func() {


need to add real test_id here

No need, removing.

noamasu · 2026-05-19T09:20:11Z

 }

-func verifyPVCRequestedSize(dataVolume *cdiv1.DataVolume, f *framework.Framework, size string) {
+func verifyPVCRequestedSize(dataVolume *cdiv1.DataVolume, f *framework.Framework, minSize, comparator string) {


maybe worth just adding another function like verifyPVCRequestedSizeExceeds for ">" instead of passing comparator?

noamasu · 2026-05-19T09:22:08Z

+			}
+
+			By(fmt.Sprintf("Create source block DataVolume %s", dataVolumeName))
+			sc := createStorageWithMinimumSupportedPVCSize(f, "4Gi")


what if actual min size of the sc is larger than 4Gi?
for example if actual min size of the storage backend is 10Gi, this test will fail?

You mean if the storage creates 10Gi in case of a smaller requested size (without using our annotation)? it will fail in the pre-clone check as the target will be too small, but I see no problem with such failure as we don't want to "guess" the backend behavior before the pvc is created. However, in a real use case, explicitly setting the minimum annotation to be aligned with the backup minimum size will solve this issue.

Ahmad-Hafe · 2026-05-19T11:11:25Z

 		f.ExpectEvent(dataVolume.Namespace).Should(ContainSubstring(controller.CloneSucceeded))

-		verifyPVCRequestedSize(dataVolume, f, testMinPvcSize)
+		verifyPVCRequestedSize(dataVolume, f, testMinPvcSize, "==")


With the new logic for filesystem clones (minimum applied first, then overhead), shouldn't the resulting PVC size be greater than the minimum rather than equal to it?

Sure, but this test is for block.

When cloning to filesystem, apply the storageProfile effective volume size (minimum supported PVC size) before inflating with filesystem overhead. It helps on cloning from block to filesystem where both have minimum supported size but the target also needs filesystem overhead on top of that, otherwise the pre-clone checks fail. Signed-off-by: Arnon Gilboa <agilboa@redhat.com> Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>

Compute testMinPvcSize in BeforeEach as max("4Gi", originalMinPvcSize) instead of a hardcoded constant, to avoid test failures on environments where the storage profile already has a minimum larger than 4Gi. Signed-off-by: Arnon Gilboa <agilboa@redhat.com> Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>

Ahmad-Hafe · 2026-05-19T17:09:10Z

/lgtm

kubevirt-bot · 2026-05-19T17:09:12Z

@Ahmad-Hafe: changing LGTM is restricted to collaborators

Details

In response to this:

/lgtm

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

kubevirt-bot · 2026-07-03T22:09:26Z

There has been no activity on this PR for 45 days.
To protect limited CI resources, it has been automatically labelled 'stale'.
This PR will automatically rot after an additional 14 days of inactivity, and will be closed shortly after that.

What you can do:

If the PR is waiting on you to respond to a question or feedback and/or update the PR, please do so.
You can mark the PR as fresh and remove the label with the following command: /remove-lifecycle stale
If this PR is safe to close now, please help the project by closing it with: /close
If you need attention on this PR from a reviewer, you can raise it on the agenda of the relevant SIG meeting or KubeVirt Community meeting, or ping the kubevirt-dev slack channel.

/lifecycle stale

kubevirt-bot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has DCO signed all their commits. labels Apr 20, 2026

kubevirt-bot requested review from alromeros and mhenriks April 20, 2026 13:46

kubevirt-bot added the size/L label Apr 20, 2026

arnongilboa force-pushed the clone_to_file_min_size_fix branch from 7fdfe12 to e80bdad Compare April 20, 2026 13:46

kubevirt-bot requested a review from akalenyu April 20, 2026 14:46

kubevirt-bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Apr 23, 2026

arnongilboa closed this Apr 29, 2026

arnongilboa reopened this May 13, 2026

arnongilboa force-pushed the clone_to_file_min_size_fix branch from e80bdad to 7d431d1 Compare May 14, 2026 15:24

arnongilboa changed the title ~~Fix clone to filesystem PVC sizing when storageProfile minimum applies~~ WIP: Fix clone to filesystem PVC sizing when storageProfile minimum applies May 14, 2026

kubevirt-bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 14, 2026

arnongilboa force-pushed the clone_to_file_min_size_fix branch from 7d431d1 to 67e56b2 Compare May 17, 2026 14:38

arnongilboa changed the title ~~WIP: Fix clone to filesystem PVC sizing when storageProfile minimum applies~~ Fix clone to filesystem PVC sizing when storageProfile minimum applies May 17, 2026

kubevirt-bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 17, 2026

arnongilboa force-pushed the clone_to_file_min_size_fix branch from 67e56b2 to 1cc1766 Compare May 18, 2026 13:52

kubevirt-bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label May 18, 2026

noamasu reviewed May 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

Ahmad-Hafe reviewed May 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

arnongilboa force-pushed the clone_to_file_min_size_fix branch from 1cc1766 to ebd0461 Compare May 19, 2026 11:55

kubevirt-prow Bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jul 3, 2026

Uh oh!

Conversation

arnongilboa commented Apr 20, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

kubevirt-bot commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

coveralls commented Apr 20, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Acedus commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Acedus commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

arnongilboa commented Apr 23, 2026

Uh oh!

arnongilboa commented May 14, 2026

Uh oh!

arnongilboa commented May 18, 2026

Uh oh!

noamasu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

noamasu May 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

arnongilboa May 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

noamasu May 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

arnongilboa May 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

noamasu May 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

arnongilboa May 19, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Ahmad-Hafe May 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

arnongilboa May 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Ahmad-Hafe commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

kubevirt-bot commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

kubevirt-bot commented Jul 3, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

arnongilboa commented Apr 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading

coveralls commented Apr 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading

arnongilboa May 19, 2026 •

edited

Loading