public inbox for linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Matthias Koenig <mkoenig@suse.de>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	ludwig.nussel@suse.de, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] New fsck option to ignore device-mapper crypto devices
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 08:32:47 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1204813967.8679.28.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <n7xejaoynp9.fsf@sor.suse.de>

On Thu, 2008-03-06 at 14:41 +0100, Matthias Koenig wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Current practice in defining crypto devices in common distributions
> has:
> 1. A definition of the device-mapper name with the corresponding device
>    in /etc/crypttab
> 2. A definition in /etc/fstab for the mountpoint of the dm device.
> 
> Steps involved into setting up the crypto devices are
> a. fsck local filesystems
> b. mount local filesystems
> c. device-mapper set up of crypto devices
> d. fsck crypto filesystems

How is fsck invoked here?  Does it use the -A flag?

> e. mount crypto filesystems
> 
> Steps a.+b. have to be done before the crypto device setup, because
> the crypto device could be in a file container on a local filesystem.
> 
> Now, the problem appears if /etc/fstab contains a mount point of a
> crypto device which is supposed to be fsck'd in step d.  fsck will
> fail in step a., since this device does not exist at this point in
> the boot process (it will be set up in step c.)

Should field 8 of /etc/fstab (fs_passno) be zero for these mount points?
Is there any reason for it to be anything different?

Alternately, would it make sense to define a special value for this
field that tells fsck to silently ignore it if the device does not
exist?

> In order to address this, I propose a new option for fsck, lets say '-X'.
> Enabling this will skip a device-mapper device which is currently
> nonexistent, but is defined in /etc/crypttab.

Could it be simplified to simply skip non-existent devices?  Should it
really be crypttab-specific?

> In this way crypto devices could be skipped without fsck failure when
> running fsck -A.
> Proposed patch to implement this below.
> 
> Regards,
> Matthias
-- 
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center


  reply	other threads:[~2008-03-06 14:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-03-06 13:41 [PATCH] [RFC] New fsck option to ignore device-mapper crypto devices Matthias Koenig
2008-03-06 14:32 ` Dave Kleikamp [this message]
2008-03-06 17:04   ` Matthias Koenig
2008-03-06 17:23     ` Dave Kleikamp
2008-03-06 17:42       ` Theodore Tso
2008-03-07 14:20       ` Matthias Koenig
2008-03-07 15:19         ` Dave Kleikamp
2008-03-12 15:59           ` Matthias Koenig
2008-03-12 20:02             ` Theodore Tso
2008-03-12 20:14               ` Theodore Tso
2008-03-13  5:37               ` Dave Kleikamp

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=1204813967.8679.28.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com \
    --to=shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ludwig.nussel@suse.de \
    --cc=mkoenig@suse.de \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /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