From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 21:45:49 +0000
Subject: Re: advice needed for gentoo bug involving lvm2/udev
Message-Id: <20111212214549.GA5336@linux1>
MIME-Version: 1
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn"
List-Id: <linux-hotplug.vger.kernel.org>
References: <20111003164149.GA13439@linux1>
In-Reply-To: <20111003164149.GA13439@linux1>
To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org


--bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 04:10:13PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 03:09:34AM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 18:41, William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > we have the following bug posted in gentoo's bugzilla:
> > >
> > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D365227.
> > >
> > > The reporter is telling me that we should use --action=3Dchange inste=
ad of
> > > --action=3Dadd in the cold boot sequence when dev is devtmpfs. Howeve=
r,
> > > this doesn't seem to be the correct fix based on earlier discussions =
on
> > > this list.
> > >
> > > Does anyone else have any suggestions for fixing this? My thought is
> > > that the rules for lvm2 should be fixed. What does everyone else thin=
k?
> >=20
> > --action=3Dadd is still the recommended and default way of doing coldpl=
ug.
> >=20
> > It should only be done once after udevd is started though, and never
> > again. All later triggers should be change only.
>=20
> The reporter is now saying that --action=3Dadd does not touch nodes that
> are already in the file system, so, for example, if you mount devtmpfs
> on /dev then call udevadm trigger --action=3Dadd, the permissions,
> ownership, etc, of nodes that already exist are not touched. So, he is
> suggesting that we add another udevadm trigger call with --action=3Dchange
> to the cold boot sequence.
>=20
> Is this a bug in udev, or should we add this extra udevadm trigger call?

Hi Kay,

I am re-sending this in case you didn't get it before.

Basically, the reporter is now saying that the udevadm trigger
--action=3Dadd is correct, but that the coldplug sequence should include
udevadm trigger --action=3Dchange after the --action=3Dadd call.

Is this correct?

Thanks,

William


--bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAk7mdg0ACgkQblQW9DDEZTjNIwCbBWXzWSdmVesojlePnxaNS0iN
NqUAoLMGXXzj6+J+o/SDi9uKbZAt5K9T
=A7di
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn--