Your message dated Mon, 15 Feb 2021 00:19:35 -0500 with message-id <YCoEZ/[email protected]> and subject line Re: Bug#927767: closing 927767 has caused the Debian Bug report #927767, regarding e2fsck: Needs to clear *all* MMP flags in one pass to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected] immediately.) -- 927767: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=927767 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: e2fsprogs Version: 1.43.4-2 Severity: minor If being run on a system which uses MMP and they weren't unmounted cleanly, e2fsck will clear the MMP flags in order individually heavily slowing the check process. At a minimum when `e2fsck -a` is run, if it needs to clear one MMP flag it should check for MMP flags on other filesystems and attempt to clear them too. Needing two MMP waits (one for `fsck /` and one for `fsck -a`) is acceptable, 3+ is not. Minor as MMP isn't that widely used yet, but a distinct pain for people using MMP if something goes crunch spectacularly. -- (\___(\___(\______ --=> 8-) EHM <=-- ______/)___/)___/) \BS ( | [email protected] PGP 87145445 | ) / \_CS\ | _____ -O #include <stddisclaimer.h> O- _____ | / _/ 8A19\___\_|_/58D2 7E3D DDF4 7BA6 <-PGP-> 41D1 B375 37D0 8714\_|_/___/5445
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---tag 927767 +wontfix thanks On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 06:17:40PM -0800, Elliott Mitchell wrote: > reopen 927767 > quit > > On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 10:42:18AM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > This is not a bug; see discussion in the bug thread. > > I think the discussion can be summarized as you stating > "this doesn't match the model I/we had envisioned for MMP". > > My stance is there is no justification for disallowing multiple > MMP-protected filesystems on a single host, not matching the original > author's mental model is not a valid justification. > > Right now there is a technical problem (often referred to as a "bug") of > a host with 50 MMP-protected filesystems will wait 50 full MMP-timeouts > after a crash. Ideally the wait on boot after a crash would be a bit > more than a single MMP-timeout by doing all phases of the MMP-flag > clearing on all MMP-protected filesystems simultaneously. The fact that *you* have a technical problem doesn't mean that e2fsprogs has a bug. MMP as currently designed is Working As Intended. That means that it is *not* a bug. Making the change which you suggested is not *possible*. E2fsck has no idea whatever file systems are being used by a particular host. If you try to use a hammer to insert a screw, and it doesn't work, it doesn't mean that the hammer has a bug. It just means you are using the wrong tool. - Ted
--- End Message ---
