fix: ignore volumes in wave calculation without provisioning

smira · smira · commit 33b5b2565236 · 2026-02-11T15:57:10.000+04:00
The waves are used in the volume manager to order provisioning of
volumes on disk (allocating a partition, etc.), so that system volumes
are done first, and only then user volumes are allocated.

The wave calculation logic had a bug though with volumes which don't
have provisioning instructions (they can be only located), e.g. the
`IMAGECACHE-ISO` volume which is only located, but never provisioned.

Such volume (if the ISO is missing) will always stay in `missing`
status, which is fine, but it shouldn't block the provisioning of the
next waves.

Moreover, if `.provisioning` is not set, reading wave from it doesn't
make sense, as it will always be zero (unset).

Also sort the volume configs accordingly, volumes without provisioning
instructions should be always processed first, they don't block others.

Signed-off-by: Andrey Smirnov &lt;andrey.smirnov@siderolabs.com&gt;
diff --git a/internal/app/machined/pkg/controllers/block/internal/volumes/volumes.go b/internal/app/machined/pkg/controllers/block/internal/volumes/volumes.go
@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ import (
 	"math"
 
 	"github.com/siderolabs/gen/optional"
+	"github.com/siderolabs/gen/value"
 
 	"github.com/siderolabs/talos/internal/pkg/encryption"
 	blockpb "github.com/siderolabs/talos/pkg/machinery/api/resource/definitions/block"
@@ -18,7 +19,12 @@ import (
 
 // CompareVolumeConfigs compares two volume configs in the proposed order of provisioning.
 func CompareVolumeConfigs(a, b *block.VolumeConfig) int {
-	// first, sort by wave, smaller wave first
+	// first, sort volumes without provisioning instructions first, as they don't block provisioning of other volumes
+	if c := cmpBool(!value.IsZero(a.TypedSpec().Provisioning), !value.IsZero(b.TypedSpec().Provisioning)); c != 0 {
+		return c
+	}
+
+	// second, sort by wave, smaller wave first
 	if c := cmp.Compare(a.TypedSpec().Provisioning.Wave, b.TypedSpec().Provisioning.Wave); c != 0 {
 		return c
 	}
diff --git a/internal/app/machined/pkg/controllers/block/internal/volumes/volumes_test.go b/internal/app/machined/pkg/controllers/block/internal/volumes/volumes_test.go
@@ -24,6 +24,18 @@ func TestCompareVolumeConfigs(t *testing.T) {
 
 		expected int
 	}{
+		{
+			name: "no provisioning instructions",
+
+			a: &block.VolumeConfigSpec{},
+			b: &block.VolumeConfigSpec{
+				Provisioning: block.ProvisioningSpec{
+					Wave: block.WaveSystemDisk,
+				},
+			},
+
+			expected: -1,
+		},
 		{
 			name: "different wave",
 
@@ -35,6 +47,9 @@ func TestCompareVolumeConfigs(t *testing.T) {
 			b: &block.VolumeConfigSpec{
 				Provisioning: block.ProvisioningSpec{
 					Wave: block.WaveUserVolumes,
+					FilesystemSpec: block.FilesystemSpec{
+						Type: block.FilesystemTypeEXT4,
+					},
 				},
 			},
 
diff --git a/internal/app/machined/pkg/controllers/block/volume_manager.go b/internal/app/machined/pkg/controllers/block/volume_manager.go
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ import (
 	"github.com/cosi-project/runtime/pkg/safe"
 	"github.com/cosi-project/runtime/pkg/state"
 	"github.com/siderolabs/gen/optional"
+	"github.com/siderolabs/gen/value"
 	"github.com/siderolabs/gen/xerrors"
 	"github.com/siderolabs/gen/xslices"
 	"go.uber.org/zap"
@@ -403,7 +404,9 @@ func (ctrl *VolumeManagerController) Run(ctx context.Context, r controller.Runti
 				volumeStatus.TypedSpec().PreFailPhase = block.VolumePhase(0)
 			}
 
-			if volumeStatus.TypedSpec().Phase != block.VolumePhaseReady {
+			// if the volume is not ready yet, we can consider the wave not fully provisioned, so the next wave can't start provisioning either
+			// but if the volume doesn't have provisioning instructions, we don't block on it being ready
+			if volumeStatus.TypedSpec().Phase != block.VolumePhaseReady && !value.IsZero(vc.TypedSpec().Provisioning) {
 				fullyProvisionedWave = vc.TypedSpec().Provisioning.Wave - 1
 			}
 
