From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
To: Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>
Cc: util-linux@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: mount nofail: what failures should we allow ?
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:00:28 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160120200028.GE14840@vapier.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160120102845.olo242uqrfzld6rh@ws.net.home>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1870 bytes --]
On 20 Jan 2016 11:28, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 06:24:58PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > i've received two requests for the "nofail" option. the doc for the
> > option is a bit ... terse ... so it's hard to guess at the overall
> > intention.
>
> man mount:
> nofail Do not report errors for this device if it does not exist.
>
> from my point of view this description is pretty explicit :-)
does it mean the device node doesn't exist (ENOENT) ? or does it also
accept the node being there, but returning other errors like ENXIO (the
driver isn't loaded) or ENOTDIR (bad path) or ENOTBLK (used a bad path
like /dev/zero) or ENOMEDIUM (the node & hardware exists, but is not
loaded) ? there's probably other errno values you could catch here.
surely you agree that "does not exist" does not cover all these cases.
or at the very least, it's pretty ambiguous/fuzzy.
> > (2) ignore unknown fs types. e.g. when a kernel config/module is missing
> > support for the requested filesystem type. so a fstab entry like:
> > ..src.. /mnt/foo somefs defaults,nofail
> > rather than error out with:
> > mount: unknown filesystem type 'somefs'
> > it would just issue a warning like it does for other nofail options.
>
> I'm not sure with this. It's unusual situation when any filesystem is unknown
> for libblkid, but it's pretty common that kernel returns EINVAL. This
> happen when a kernel config/module is missing, but also if you specify
> wrong mount options and in some another situations. I don't think we
> want to hide such problems. It's too generic...
i think there's a lot going on in this response. let me distill it a
bit. if i have a reiserfs that is usable, but i forgot to enable or
load the reiserfs kernel driver, should nofail be allowed to skip ?
or is this a hard failure ?
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-20 20:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-19 23:24 mount nofail: what failures should we allow ? Mike Frysinger
2016-01-20 10:28 ` Karel Zak
2016-01-20 20:00 ` Mike Frysinger [this message]
2016-01-21 10:18 ` Karel Zak
2016-01-20 20:20 ` [PATCH] mount: allow nofail to silence ENOMEDIUM cases Mike Frysinger
2016-01-21 9:51 ` Karel Zak
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=20160120200028.GE14840@vapier.lan \
--to=vapier@gentoo.org \
--cc=kzak@redhat.com \
--cc=util-linux@vger.kernel.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