On 10/07/2014 11:17 AM, Karel Zak wrote: > On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 10:59:00PM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote: >> On 10/06/2014 07:40 PM, Karel Zak wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 06:35:20PM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote: >>>> One last details is that the system uses pretty old stuff: kernel >>>> 3.4.50, util-linux 2.21.1. >>> >>> $ git log --oneline v2.21.. -- lib/loopdev.c sys-utils/losetup.c | wc -l >>> 62 >>> >>>> Could anybody give me some help ? >>> >>> update, this is upstream mailing list I have doubts anyone is ready >>> to help you with code released 2 years ago. >> >> well it looks like more a kernel issue since the sequence of syscalls >> done by losetup looks correct. Maybe someone here already encountered >> this... >> >> I just found that loop module was loaded with max_part=16 and >> CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LOOP_MIN_COUNT=8. If max_part is set to 0 then the issue >> is gone :-/ > > Well, if you have kernel that provides /dev/loop-control then you > don't have to set CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LOOP_MIN_COUNT at all. I guess > "8" (kernel upstream default?) is mostly about backward compatibility. > > For example fedora uses CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LOOP_MIN_COUNT=0. All is > dynamically allocated by kernel + udev. You're right, CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LOOP_MIN_COUNT can be set to 0. But that doesnt explain my initial issue. I have to understand why setting up a loop dev fails if the number of loop used is > 1 and max_part != 0. Thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
