shoulnt "crypt_init_by_name()" fail when the underlying device is no longer available?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




test using cryptsetup version 1.5.1

simple test:
1. open a mapper against a device.

2 call crypt_init_by_name() on the mapper and the call return "0" to mean success,this is expected.

3.Unplug the device.

4.call the function again and it still return "0" to mean success,shouldnt it fail since the underlying device is no longer available?

Simple test to show this:

open a mapper against a device:
root@mtz ink]# cryptsetup luksOpen /dev/sdc6 sdc6
Enter passphrase for /dev/sdc6:

run the "test" program on the mapper and results are below( source code below )
[root@mtz ink]# ./test /dev/mapper/sdc6
pass1
pass2

unplugged the device and rerun the test again and the results are below.
[root@mtz ink]# ./test /dev/mapper/sdc6
pass1
fail2
[root@mtz ink]#


source code of the test program:


#include<libcryptsetup.h>

int main( int argc,char * argv[] )
{
    const char * path = argv[ 1 ] ;
    struct crypt_device * cd;
   
    if( crypt_init_by_name( &cd,path ) < 0 ){
        puts( "fail1" ) ;
        crypt_free( cd ) ;
        return 1 ;
    }else{
        puts( "pass1" ) ;
    }
   
    const char * e = crypt_get_device_name( cd ) ;
   
    if( e ){
        puts( "pass2" ) ;
    }else{
        puts( "fail2" ) ;
    }
   
    crypt_free( cd ) ;
   
    return 0 ;
}

_______________________________________________
dm-crypt mailing list
dm-crypt@xxxxxxxx
http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt

[Index of Archives]     [Device Mapper Devel]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux