Victor Lowther wrote:
It seems that there are two major use cases that make mounting the root file system directly from a udev rule an inadvisable design decision: The first is when your root filesystem does not reside on a block device, as in the nfsroot case. In this case, there is no backing device for the filesystem for udev to detect, so we would still need a non-udev method of mounting the root filesystem in order to handle any case where there is no backing device for the root filesystem. The second is when we are asked to resume from hibernate. In this case, we must not attempt to mount the root filesystem (or any other filesystem, for that matter) until we have either attempted to resume (and failed) or we have determined that resuming is impossible. Udev does not make any guarantees about the order in which devices are discovered, which leads to all sorts of interesting potential failure modes when you have either or both of resume handling and rootfs handling in a udev rule. Thoughts?
You are right. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe initramfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
