On Mon Jan 20 23:40:54 2014 Alexander Tsoy <alexander@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> В Mon, 20 Jan 2014 17:41:10 +0100
> Thomas Renninger <trenn@xxxxxxx> пишет:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > due to a bug in another tool it came out that
> > systemd/dracut cannot mount /sysroot if the same rootflags=
> > parameter is passed twice:
> > rootflags=subvol=@ rootflags=subvol=@
> >
> > Yep, this should be fixed somewhere else, but I still
> > like to make the /sysroot mount more robust or at least find
> > out what what is going on more detailed.
> >
> > journalctl -b -u sysroot.mount
> > Jan 20 15:02:30 localhost systemd[1]: Failed to mount /sysroot.
> > Jan 20 15:02:30 localhost systemd[1]: Unit sysroot.mount entered
> > failed state. Jan 20 15:16:46 localhost systemd[1]:
> > Mounting /sysroot... Jan 20 15:16:46 localhost mount[970]: mount:
> > wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/vda2, Jan 20
> > 15:16:46 localhost systemd[1]: sysroot.mount mount process exited,
> > code=exited status=32
> >
> >
> > It looks like in
> > modules.d/99base/parse-root-opts.sh
> > rflags is made to "subvol=@,subvol=@"
> > and
> > modules.d/95rootfs-block/mount-root.sh
> > fails due to passing this as -o to mount?
> >
> > But what I am mostly missing is any dracut warning.
> > I should see:
> > modules.d/95rootfs-block/mount-root.sh:
> > while ! mount -t ${rootfs} -o "$_rflags_ro" "${root#block:}"
> > "$NEWROOT"; do warn "Failed to mount -t ${rootfs} -o $_rflags_ro
> > ${root#block:} $NEWROOT" fsck_ask_err
> > done
> > ?
>
> No. In your case rootflags are handled by systemd-fstab-generator.
And, of course, systemd is actually mounting root fs, not the mount-root.sh script.
> Comment from systemd sources (src/fstab-generator/fstab-generator.c):
>
> /* root= and roofstype= may occur more than once, the last instance
> should take precedence.
> * In the case of multiple rootflags= the arguments should be
> concatenated */
>
> You can see the generated mount unit from emergency shell. It should be
> located here:
> /run/systemd/generator/sysroot.mount
>
> >
> > This would give an obvios hint what is going wrong.
> >
> > But I cannot find where "warn" is even defined.
> >
> > Could be that I came on the wrong track somewhere.
> > I guess there cannot be made much against passing bad (or doubled)
> > rootflags= options, things will simply fail then, right?
> >
> > Still it would be nice if someone can give me a hint how I can
> > debug similar stuff easier next time.
> >
> > Thanks!
--
Alexander Tsoy
--
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
