On 09/14/2017 04:17 AM, Christophe LEROY wrote: > Le 14/09/2017 à 01:51, Rob Landley a écrit : >> From: Rob Landley <rob@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Make initramfs honor CONFIG_DEVTMPFS_MOUNT, and move >> /dev/console open after devtmpfs mount. >> >> Add workaround for Debian bug that was copied by Ubuntu. > > Is that a bug only for Debian ? Why ? Look down, specifically this bit: >> v2 discussion: >> http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1705.2/05611.html That's some discussion of version 2 of this patch, which was merged for a while last dev cycle, then backed out again because it triggered the same bug in a number of system init scripts: http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1705.2/07072.html http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1705.3/01182.html http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1705.3/01505.html http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1705.3/01320.html All of whom copied the broken error "recovery" path from debian. If they checked whether it was already mounted, or didn't _blank_ the /dev directory in response to mounting the exact same filesystem over itself giving -EBUSY, the system would work fine. Heck, if you built a kernel with a static /dev in initramfs and no devtmpfs configured in, the script would break things exactly the same way. The breakage is that script takes a hammer to a perfectly functional /dev directory and then continues the boot with an empty /dev. That's bonkers. > Why should a Debian bug be fixed by a workaround in the mainline kernel ? That was my argument last time, and the answer was "Breaking userspace is bad, mmmkay." Even when userspace is doing something REALLY OBVIOUSLY STUPID and it is _clearly_ their fault, as long as they got there first they've established the status quo and it doesn't matter how silly it is. This was explicitly stated to me here: http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1705.3/03292.html I.E. don't argue with me, argue with him. :) So, I added a workaround with a printk in hopes of embarassing them into someday fixing it. Rob
