Bastian Blank wrote: > On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 09:41:24PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote: >> Discussing with upstream, 95-devkit-disks.rules was changed to only act on >> "change" events (and not "add|change") > > The rules may still be called with the device suspended and then block > udev to handle further rules and events, including the callback to the > devmapper tools. This is a classic race condition and I have no recipe > for this yet.
Should I add a check for DM_SUSPENDED==1 then, just like DM_HIDE? >> Hopefully this addresses your remaining complaints in a sufficient manner so >> the >> conflicts in dmsetup can be removed again. > > I accept that for now. But if it starts to break things I'll come back. Fair enough. Admittedly, the interaction between udev, device-mapper/lvm2/crypsetup/mdadm and dk-disks is not ideal yet. So constructive input how to improve that in the future, is very much appreciated. I also strongly believe, that we should closely work with upstream on such matters, so not every disto is doing "their own thing" and ideally we have a common set of core udev rules where 3rd party apps can rely on. Which leads me to a bit unrelated question: Your dm/lvm2 udev rules look quite well written, but they also look significantly different from what upstream lvm2 is shipping. Have you considered to push your changes upstream? What about --enable-udev_sync, is this something we want in Debian? Cheers, Michael P.S: dk-disks 009-1 has been uploaded today, so I would appreciate of dmsetup at your earliest convenience -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Pkg-utopia-maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-utopia-maintainers
