Shelly, please take a look.

Additional debugging:

I created a new VM, win-resize-test with a 40Gi root disk and used virtctl guestfs to resize the OS into the larger PVC, reserving about 5.5% for overhead as CDI does.

I was able to snapshot and restore this VM without issue.

Additionally, just to ensure the environment, I created a RHEL8 VM using default settings. It performed a snapshot and restore without issue.

It is possible the size mismatch is coming from a bug in UI.

I recreated the base win2k19 image with a 22Gi DV.

$ oc -n openshift-virtualization-os-images get dv win2k19 -o yaml| grep storage
    cdi.kubevirt.io/storage.bind.immediate.requested: "true"
    cdi.kubevirt.io/storage.clone.token: eyJhbGciOiJQUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IiJ9.eyJleHAiOjE2MzcxNjg2MTUsImlhdCI6MTYzNzE2ODMxNSwiaXNzIjoiY2RpLWFwaXNlcnZlciIsIm5hbWUiOiJ3aW5kb3dzLWluc3RhbGwtcm9vdGRpc2siLCJuYW1lc3BhY2UiOiJrdWJldmlydC1naXRvcHMiLCJuYmYiOjE2MzcxNjgzMTUsIm9wZXJ0YXRpb24iOiJDbG9uZSIsInBhcmFtcyI6eyJ0YXJnZXROYW1lIjoid2luMmsxOSIsInRhcmdldE5hbWVzcGFjZSI6Im9wZW5zaGlmdC12aXJ0dWFsaXphdGlvbi1vcy1pbWFnZXMifSwicmVzb3VyY2UiOnsiZ3JvdXAiOiIiLCJyZXNvdXJjZSI6InBlcnNpc3RlbnR2b2x1bWVjbGFpbXMiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjoidjEifX0.ucsCMmluPrSXQaOfhY6e_CLC8b0d56zgoXop82FnDU7mcVvGUj0cdT0asxDZ5I0_2nUS5DrqviDR2BYU79yhkwAmDLbY5NroumV9CufIqBjnjeQpVX50Pzh0dB-0byNTxZR8HEqdBCGq8QYJgNU9C_Cva0OpDBQmFzPqJotv9oVlUHnM-gQi__t59KpJIJrhArAO95KnsNHVKN2jEvzGzQT0YAsz67cvXxo-xzCZN0Md-rfofM-TRyNmBAmfO3ugjUQAP09APXoTj6k814TDD46Ry_I0Br-5QT2Isv0TLhevr_tvsM9HhQL3IwtVbuYpbcJ2_Jzm7aiCIbwZzjWsAw
      {"apiVersion":"cdi.kubevirt.io/v1beta1","kind":"DataVolume","metadata":{"annotations":{"cdi.kubevirt.io/storage.bind.immediate.requested":"true","kubevirt.ui/provider":"Microsoft"},"name":"win2k19","namespace":"openshift-virtualization-os-images"},"spec":{"pvc":{"accessModes":["ReadWriteOnce"],"resources":{"requests":{"storage":"22Gi"}}},"source":{"pvc":{"name":"windows-install-rootdisk","namespace":"kubevirt-gitops"}}}}
        storage: 22Gi

and its pvc:

$ oc -n openshift-virtualization-os-images get pvc win2k19

NAME      STATUS   VOLUME                                     CAPACITY   ACCESS MODES   STORAGECLASS          AGE
win2k19   Bound    pvc-353b979e-a9bf-4fb4-8518-e379dc0affc4   22Gi       RWO            cnv-integration-svm   5h29m


I then create a VM using the console wizard, and it says it is creating a VM with 9G storage.

Looking at the resultant DV:

$ oc get dv win2k19-magnificent-manatee -o yaml | grep storage
    cdi.kubevirt.io/storage.clone.token: eyJhbGciOiJQUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IiJ9.eyJleHAiOjE2MzcxODgyMjgsImlhdCI6MTYzNzE4NzkyOCwiaXNzIjoiY2RpLWFwaXNlcnZlciIsIm5hbWUiOiJ3aW4yazE5IiwibmFtZXNwYWNlIjoib3BlbnNoaWZ0LXZpcnR1YWxpemF0aW9uLW9zLWltYWdlcyIsIm5iZiI6MTYzNzE4NzkyOCwib3BlcnRhdGlvbiI6IkNsb25lIiwicGFyYW1zIjp7InRhcmdldE5hbWUiOiJ3aW4yazE5LW1hZ25pZmljZW50LW1hbmF0ZWUiLCJ0YXJnZXROYW1lc3BhY2UiOiJkZWZhdWx0In0sInJlc291cmNlIjp7Imdyb3VwIjoiIiwicmVzb3VyY2UiOiJwZXJzaXN0ZW50dm9sdW1lY2xhaW1zIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6InYxIn19.q0Dpvygf9kAIxC4Gfh8s0KNxKfR0p_YkR9S4eCT2D4HToCHVcRo07R23OMXHb-e7SdU9O9vUjSsQ5kXJ1jmSIyBjHroExvL6FYU3wU0GFsZtmkSM3bLLgTO4x6BR6ZkHqJQ34m5MOUxdTSJ0ogyB2gQ_gn0JGp-bnVzCRhsRVWw5pnv3t8jm1CVOtDtm2QZxgvpafXrdPoTYAFhHjmlh81fs0EnP5wUpR_Nu1FMYy0VOq4Y2kH0a5fGB5WUGUGjU-PeQ1KCIc6_OWFlIplmVXSq_i-yv8nhftdRokfh51NzPO-JXDqL2FgIBK13EgcQGyziVxbbpgDLoa4kIQnS9iw
        storage: 10186796Ki
    storageClassName: cnv-integration-svm

The storage is way low, however:

$ oc get pvc win2k19-magnificent-manatee 

NAME                          STATUS   VOLUME                                     CAPACITY   ACCESS MODES   STORAGECLASS          AGE
win2k19-magnificent-manatee   Bound    pvc-b422dcd1-87d9-4d38-b0f0-6276b14a288b   22Gi       RWO            cnv-integration-svm   7m51s

Snapshot:

$ oc get vmsnapshot,volumesnapshot,pvc | grep manatee
virtualmachinesnapshot.snapshot.kubevirt.io/win2k19-magnificent-manatee-2021-11-17   VirtualMachine   win2k19-magnificent-manatee   Succeeded   true         4m32s          
volumesnapshot.snapshot.storage.k8s.io/vmsnapshot-b73f4fd6-e71e-49bf-be8c-5d0fef96e960-volume-win2k19-magnificent-manatee   true         win2k19-magnificent-manatee                                                     10100400Ki    csi-snapclass   snapcontent-6025e952-779e-44b8-87f3-5037de4ca7b1   4m33s          4m33s
persistentvolumeclaim/win2k19-magnificent-manatee                              Bound     pvc-b422dcd1-87d9-4d38-b0f0-6276b14a288b   22Gi       RWO            cnv-integration-svm   17m

It then creates a restore of insufficient size:
$ oc get pvc restore-21fef1e1-62b9-4caa-bfed-e38a7538d99d-win2k19-magnificent-manatee -o yaml
apiVersion: v1
kind: PersistentVolumeClaim
metadata:
  annotations:
    k8s.io/CloneOf: "true"
    k8s.io/SmartCloneRequest: "true"
    restore.kubevirt.io/name: win2k19-magnificent-manatee-2021-11-17-restore-fmtfni
    volume.beta.kubernetes.io/storage-provisioner: csi.trident.netapp.io
  creationTimestamp: "2021-11-17T22:43:34Z"
  finalizers:
  - kubernetes.io/pvc-protection
  labels:
    app: containerized-data-importer
    app.kubernetes.io/component: storage
    app.kubernetes.io/managed-by: cdi-controller
    app.kubernetes.io/part-of: hyperconverged-cluster
    app.kubernetes.io/version: v4.9.0
    cdi-controller: cdi-tmp-f8dfe527-ade8-48a5-ad20-9bf514829cac
    cdi.kubevirt.io: cdi-smart-clone
  name: restore-21fef1e1-62b9-4caa-bfed-e38a7538d99d-win2k19-magnificent-manatee
  namespace: default
  ownerReferences:
  - apiVersion: kubevirt.io/v1
    blockOwnerDeletion: true
    controller: true
    kind: VirtualMachine
    name: win2k19-magnificent-manatee
    uid: 2ae73de8-d362-49d1-aad3-86f21cb8a08b
  resourceVersion: "14966926"
  uid: 1e43066c-7f6a-4505-b914-3d53b547b3cd
spec:
  accessModes:
  - ReadWriteOnce
  dataSource:
    apiGroup: snapshot.storage.k8s.io
    kind: VolumeSnapshot
    name: vmsnapshot-b73f4fd6-e71e-49bf-be8c-5d0fef96e960-volume-win2k19-magnificent-manatee
  resources:
    requests:
      storage: 10080872Ki
  storageClassName: cnv-integration-svm
  volumeMode: Filesystem
status:
  phase: Pending

Shelly, is there any updates for this bug?

We are unable to reproduce this bug and will close it.  If it continues to be an issue please reopen it.

This is still an issue, if it's a matter of access to the cluster, I can provide that. (and apologies if I missed earlier, and/or had a broken cluster at the time...)

Here is another example:

My Windows install job creates a VM with the following dataVolumeTemplate:


  dataVolumeTemplates:
  - metadata:
      name: windows-install-rootdisk
    spec:
      pvc:
        accessModes:
        - ReadWriteOnce
        resources:
          requests:
            storage: 22Gi
      source:
        blank: {}

The installer ends up writing around 10Gi to the disk, and I use the following DV to clone it into openshift-virtualization-os-images:

apiVersion: cdi.kubevirt.io/v1beta1
kind: DataVolume
metadata:
  name: win2k19
  namespace: openshift-virtualization-os-images
  annotations:
    cdi.kubevirt.io/storage.bind.immediate.requested: "true"
    kubevirt.ui/provider: Microsoft
spec:
  source:
    pvc:
      namespace: kubevirt-gitops
      name: windows-install-rootdisk
  storage: 
    accessModes:
    - ReadWriteOnce
    resources:
      requests:
        storage: 22Gi

This ends up creating the following PVC in openshift-virtualization-os-images:

apiVersion: v1
kind: PersistentVolumeClaim
metadata:
  annotations:
    cdi.kubevirt.io/ownedByDataVolume: openshift-virtualization-os-images/win2k19
    cdi.kubevirt.io/readyForTransfer: "true"
    cdi.kubevirt.io/smartCloneSnapshot: kubevirt-gitops/cdi-tmp-96428e41-993d-4c45-9542-db80a83388ca
    cdi.kubevirt.io/storage.condition.running: "False"
    cdi.kubevirt.io/storage.condition.running.message: Clone Complete
    cdi.kubevirt.io/storage.condition.running.reason: Completed
    cdi.kubevirt.io/storage.populatedFor: win2k19
    k8s.io/CloneOf: "true"
    k8s.io/SmartCloneRequest: "true"
    pv.kubernetes.io/bind-completed: "yes"
    pv.kubernetes.io/bound-by-controller: "yes"
    volume.beta.kubernetes.io/storage-provisioner: csi.trident.netapp.io
    volume.kubernetes.io/storage-provisioner: csi.trident.netapp.io
  creationTimestamp: "2022-03-30T18:47:20Z"
  finalizers:
  - kubernetes.io/pvc-protection
  labels:
    alerts.k8s.io/KubePersistentVolumeFillingUp: disabled
    app: containerized-data-importer
    app.kubernetes.io/component: storage
    app.kubernetes.io/managed-by: cdi-controller
    app.kubernetes.io/part-of: hyperconverged-cluster
    app.kubernetes.io/version: 4.10.0
    cdi-controller: cdi-tmp-96428e41-993d-4c45-9542-db80a83388ca
    cdi.kubevirt.io: cdi-smart-clone
  name: win2k19
  namespace: openshift-virtualization-os-images
  ownerReferences:
  - apiVersion: cdi.kubevirt.io/v1beta1
    blockOwnerDeletion: true
    controller: true
    kind: DataVolume
    name: win2k19
    uid: 96428e41-993d-4c45-9542-db80a83388ca
  resourceVersion: "17272464"
  uid: b08eea7e-ef6f-411f-a20f-ceb81735eaea
spec:
  accessModes:
  - ReadWriteOnce
  dataSource:
    apiGroup: snapshot.storage.k8s.io
    kind: VolumeSnapshot
    name: cdi-tmp-96428e41-993d-4c45-9542-db80a83388ca
  resources:
    requests:
      storage: 10377400Ki
  storageClassName: cnv-integration-svm
  volumeMode: Filesystem
  volumeName: pvc-1784ae57-2465-42b4-bcb9-d710f83271c2
status:
  accessModes:
  - ReadWriteOnce
  capacity:
    storage: 22Gi
  phase: Bound

Note that under spec.resources.requests.storage, something has reduced the size to 10377400Ki which is 9.89 GiB

Chandler,

Shelly, I thought that this might be a dup of 2064936 but that seems impossible since this bug is related to VMSnapshotRestore which is a kubevirt feature and 2064936 deals with filesystem overhead calculations made by CDI.  Please work with Chandler to further diagnose.

regarding:  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2021354#c11

I am not sure that the PVC is undersized.  The PVC size in the status (status.capacity.storage) is (correctly) reported as 22Gi.

Regarding the value in `spec.resources.requests.storage`.  When doing a "smart clone" that value is initially set from the `status.restoreSize` of the snapshot here [1].  Since it was stated that approximately 10G was written to the blank disk, this initial value could make sense.

The smart clone process then extends the PVC to the requested size by updating the PVC spec.resources.requests.storage.  It is strange that the PVC does not reflect this update.  But based on the current value of status.capacity.storage it appears to have been resized correctly.

[1] https://github.com/kubevirt/containerized-data-importer/blob/v1.48.1/pkg/controller/smart-clone-controller.go#L378

After digging into this for a bit, I can see how the DataVolume in [1] would be problematic if it was part a VMSnapshot+VMRestore.

The main issue is that the requested size PVC size (10377400Ki) is smaller than the actual PVC size (22Gi) and the snapshot/restore controllers do not handle this totally valid situation correctly.  The restore controller will create a 10377400Ki PVC.  This is obviously problematic because the snapshot may be up to 22G.

There are a couple flawed assumptions in the current snapshot/restore logic.

1.  The "status.restoreSize" of a VolumeSnapshot equals "spec.resources.requests.storage" of source PVC
2.  The source PVC "spec.resources.requests.storage" equals "status.capacity.storage"

With some provisioners (ceph rbd), the above is true.  But clearly that is not always the case as here with netapp trident


I believe this issue can be addressed as follows:

1. VirtualMachineSnapshots should include "status.capacity.storage" for each PVC.  Not necessarily the entire PVC status, but a least that part 
2. VM Restore controller has to more intelligently restore PVCs
   A.  If storage class supports expansion
     i.   Create target PVC with initial size of VolumeSnapshot "status.restoreSize"
     ii.  Expand PVC to have size equal to source PVC "status.capacity.storage" if necessary
   B.  If expansion not supported
     i.  Create target PVC with initial size of PVC "status.capacity.storage"
     ii. Hope for the best (works fine with trident)


The remaining question is how to handle with restoring from old VM snapshots.  There are a couple options:

1.  Validating webhook can check for each volume in VMsnapshot that VolumeSnapshot "status.restoreSize" > PVC "spec.resources.requests.storage" and reject if so
2.  Instead of rejecting, create new target PVC some X% bigger than VolumeSnapshot "status.restoreSize"


[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2021354#c11

One more important issue to note.  Smart clone does not update "spec.resources.requests.storage" if "status.capacity.storage" is >= desired target size.  This is how we ended up with the PVC in [1].  We should fix that.  The code is here:  https://github.com/kubevirt/containerized-data-importer/blob/main/pkg/controller/datavolume-controller.go#L1337-L1348

Although this bug would be fixed with only the above fix, it has exposed some flaws in the snapshot/restore logic.  Specifically, handling PVCs with more data than "spec.resources.requests.storage".

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2021354#c11

One more important issue to note.  Smart clone does not update "spec.resources.requests.storage" if "status.capacity.storage" is >= desired target size.  This is how we ended up with the PVC in [1].  We should fix that.  The code is here:  https://github.com/kubevirt/containerized-data-importer/blob/main/pkg/controller/datavolume-controller.go#L1337-L1348

Although this bug would be fixed with only the above fix, it has exposed some flaws in the snapshot/restore logic.  Specifically, handling PVCs with more data than "spec.resources.requests.storage".

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2021354#c11

As Michael mentioned I'm working on the fix in Smart clone. The flaws in the snapshot restore process will be considered and handled.

Adding here a link to the bug we opened as a result of this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2086825

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory (OpenShift Virtualization 4.9.5 Images), and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2022:5389