On Thu, 2008-03-06 at 14:41 +0100, Matthias Koenig wrote: > Hi, > > Current practice in defining crypto devices in common distributions > has: > 1. A definition of the device-mapper name with the corresponding device > in /etc/crypttab > 2. A definition in /etc/fstab for the mountpoint of the dm device. > > Steps involved into setting up the crypto devices are > a. fsck local filesystems > b. mount local filesystems > c. device-mapper set up of crypto devices > d. fsck crypto filesystems How is fsck invoked here? Does it use the -A flag? > e. mount crypto filesystems > > Steps a.+b. have to be done before the crypto device setup, because > the crypto device could be in a file container on a local filesystem. > > Now, the problem appears if /etc/fstab contains a mount point of a > crypto device which is supposed to be fsck'd in step d. fsck will > fail in step a., since this device does not exist at this point in > the boot process (it will be set up in step c.) Should field 8 of /etc/fstab (fs_passno) be zero for these mount points? Is there any reason for it to be anything different? Alternately, would it make sense to define a special value for this field that tells fsck to silently ignore it if the device does not exist? > In order to address this, I propose a new option for fsck, lets say '-X'. > Enabling this will skip a device-mapper device which is currently > nonexistent, but is defined in /etc/crypttab. Could it be simplified to simply skip non-existent devices? Should it really be crypttab-specific? > In this way crypto devices could be skipped without fsck failure when > running fsck -A. > Proposed patch to implement this below. > > Regards, > Matthias -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
