From: Lennart Poettering <lennart@poettering.net>
To: kreijack@inwind.it
Cc: systemd Mailing List <systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] [survey] BTRFS_IOC_DEVICES_READY return status
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 23:02:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150617210202.GA30833@gardel-login> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5581C60A.6090505@libero.it>
On Wed, 17.06.15 21:10, Goffredo Baroncelli (kreijack@libero.it) wrote:
> > Well, /bin/mount is not a daemon, and it should not be one.
>
> My helper is not a deamon; you was correct the first time: it blocks
> until all needed/enough devices are appeared.
> Anyway this should not be different from mounting a nfs
> filesystem. Even in this case the mount helper blocks until the
> connection happened. The block time is not negligible, even tough
> not long as a device timeout ...
Well, the mount tool doesn't wait for the network to be configured or
so. It just waits for a response from the server. That's quite a
difference.
> > Well, it's not really ugly. I mean, if the state or properties of a
> > device change, then udev should update its information about it, and
> > that's done via a retrigger. We do that all the time already, for
> > example when an existing loopback device gets a backing file assigned
> > or removed. I am pretty sure that loopback case is very close to what
> > you want to do here, hence retriggering (either from the kernel side,
> > or from userspace), appears like an OK thing to do.
>
> What seems strange to me is that in this case the devices don't have changed their status.
> How this problem is managed in the md/dm raid cases ?
md has a daemon mdmon to my knowledge.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-17 21:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-12 13:16 [survey] BTRFS_IOC_DEVICES_READY return status Anand Jain
2015-06-12 18:04 ` [systemd-devel] " Andrei Borzenkov
2015-06-12 20:08 ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2015-06-13 9:35 ` Anand Jain
2015-06-13 15:09 ` Goffredo Baroncelli
[not found] ` <pan$63061$a3cdf5f6$a390adbd$e6097ad9@cox.net>
2015-06-14 19:44 ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2015-06-15 10:46 ` Lennart Poettering
2015-06-15 17:23 ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2015-06-15 17:38 ` Lennart Poettering
2015-06-17 19:10 ` Goffredo Baroncelli
2015-06-17 21:02 ` Lennart Poettering [this message]
2015-06-18 2:40 ` Andrei Borzenkov
2015-06-14 5:48 ` Andrei Borzenkov
2015-06-15 10:41 ` Lennart Poettering
2015-06-13 7:20 ` btrfs filesystem show confused when label is same as mountpoint Sjoerd
2015-06-13 9:51 ` Duncan
2015-06-25 16:37 ` David Sterba
2015-06-15 10:27 ` [survey] BTRFS_IOC_DEVICES_READY return status Lennart Poettering
2015-06-15 15:01 ` David Sterba
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150617210202.GA30833@gardel-login \
--to=lennart@poettering.net \
--cc=kreijack@inwind.it \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox