On Tue, 19.08.14 15:46, Ivan Shapovalov ([email protected]) wrote: > On Monday 18 August 2014 at 22:04:29, Ivan Shapovalov wrote: > > [..] > > > > > > > > Even if initramfs-only, ordering dependencies still need to be worked > > > > out. > > > > Inside of initramfs, neither systemd-fsck-root.service nor > > > > systemd-remount-fs.service > > > > do exist, so there's apparently nothing to reliably order against. > > > > > > Well, in the initrd the root dir is mounted to /sysroot, which means you > > > should be able to order yourself before sysroot.mount. > > > > > > Lennart > > > > > > > > > > ...missing sysroot's fsck, as well as any other x-initrd mounts and their > > fsck instances. > > > > Seems that sysroot.mount alone isn't sufficient. > > ...Anything on this? > > Should we add yet another passive target(s), something like fsck-pre? I don't > actually know what is the best way to tackle this. The resume unit shall be > activated before any writes to any block devices, including fsck, cryptsetup > and whatever else.
Hmm, so I though a bit about this, and I think we should make the following changes to systemd: a) move local-fs-pre.target before all the fsck. This way we can make use of it as a barrier against modifications of any fs. b) introduce initrd-fs-pre.target that then plays a similar role, but in the initrd. A service that wants to run before any fs is touched should then order itself before both and everything should be good. If this makes sense, I would be happy to take a patch. I'd be willing to merge a good patch for a generator + mini-tool that parse the resume= option into systemd as well, btw. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
