[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH fstools] Revert "block: mount_action: handle mount/umount deps"

[Yousong Zhou]

On Fri, 27 Dec 2019 at 16:53, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal at milecki.pl>
>
> This reverts commit 32c3126b2f0464106d74317336b6aef1d7d5f82f.
>
> Internal list of devices guarantees some basic sorting (by device type
> and then a name) but nothing more. In particular it's not guaranteed
> (and it's actually quite uncommon) that all preceding entries are parent
> devices.
>
> Mounting all preceding devices may easily result in unrelated mounts.
> They can fail easily basically breaking original mounting attempt, e.g.:
>
> daemon.err blockd: kernel is requesting a mount -> sda2
> daemon.err block: /dev/sda1 is already mounted on /tmp/run/blockd/sda1
> daemon.err block: autofs: "add" action has failed: -1
> daemon.err blockd: failed to run block. add/sda2

Sorry for the inconvenience.  But the error (regression) should be
caused by 2f2a09ad ("block: mount_device: err log only when mp
deviates from spec").  m->target is expected to match the actual mount
point only when it is not managed by blockd (m->autofs).

Please see if the following patch works.  We can also check if m is
managed by autofs and m->target a symlink whose target matches mp, but
that's a bit overkill.

--- a/block.c
+++ b/block.c
@@ -1100,7 +1100,7 @@ static int mount_device(struct device *dev, int type)

        mp = find_mount_point(pr->dev);
        if (mp) {
-               if (m && m->type == TYPE_MOUNT && strcmp(m->target, mp)) {
+               if (m && !m->autofs && m->type == TYPE_MOUNT &&
strcmp(m->target, mp)) {
                        ULOG_ERR("%s is already mounted on %s\n", pr->dev, mp);
                        err = -1;
                } else


>
> If some dependency handling is required it should be implemented
> explicitly as current solution isn't reliable and it breaks autofs when
> using multiple devices (partitions).
>

Dependencies are directly implied by mount target as specified in the
uci config file.  This relationship is inherently there.  E.g.

 1. mount target /mnt/a
 2. mount target /mnt/a/b

Then "1" must mount before "2".  "2" before "1" is not practically
useful in any way.

Regards,
                yousong

_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel