Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

Lennart Poettering [2015-05-18 14:10 +0200]: > The whole point of the "tentative" state is that devices showing up in > /proc/self/mountinfo but not in /sys are put in it. Are you saying > that does not work? Simple demonstration with some bind mount: # systemd-nspawn -b -D /tmp/myroot --bind /

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

Hello Lennart, Lennart Poettering [2015-05-18 14:10 +0200]: > I don't really grok what the problem you are experencing is supposed > to be: note that a device showing up in /proc/self/mountinfo means it > will be set to "tentative" state, and thus will not resolve in an > unmount. What more do you

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

On Mon, 18.05.15 06:41, Martin Pitt (martin.p...@ubuntu.com) wrote: > Lennart Poettering [2015-05-17 18:06 +0200]: > > More specifically, they should follow the second item in the > > "Execution Environment" section: pre-mount /sys read-only in the > > container. > > That's the default indeed, bu

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

Andrei Borzenkov [2015-05-14 14:24 +0300]: > Will it be "rebound" when device appears? Otherwise any mount that > happens before udev is started/happens to notice device will not be > associated with device. Most common case is probably mounts inherited > from initrd. Not with the first patch (the

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

Lennart Poettering [2015-05-17 18:06 +0200]: > More specifically, they should follow the second item in the > "Execution Environment" section: pre-mount /sys read-only in the > container. That's the default indeed, but you can configure it otherwise. While that might be questionable, it's just one

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

On Sun, 17.05.15 13:02, Martin Pitt (martin.p...@ubuntu.com) wrote: > Hey Lennart, > > Lennart Poettering [2015-05-14 18:09 +0200]: > > > As I mentioned before, simply ignoring /dev/root doesn't help in all > > > cases, and hardcoding it in the code is a bit ugly. > > > > It doesn't help in all

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

Hey Lennart, Lennart Poettering [2015-05-14 18:09 +0200]: > > As I mentioned before, simply ignoring /dev/root doesn't help in all > > cases, and hardcoding it in the code is a bit ugly. > > It doesn't help in all cases? Which ones? Can you elaborate? It doesn't seem to help at all in e. g. LXC.

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

On Thu, 14.05.15 12:51, Martin Pitt (martin.p...@ubuntu.com) wrote: > > This is very bad. As a harmless action like following: > > > > # mount --bind /opt /opt > > > > Results in opt.mount unit to be generated which BindsTo > > dev-root.device, which is inactive, thus systemd tries to stop that

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

В Thu, 14 May 2015 12:51:37 +0200 Martin Pitt пишет: > Hello all, > > Dimitri John Ledkov [2015-05-13 12:48 +0100]: > > I am booting without initramfs, using a plan9 filesystem as rootfs in a kvm. > > > > Thus my /proc/cmdline has: > > root=/dev/root rootflags=rw,trans=virtio,version=9p2000.L r

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

Hello all, Dimitri John Ledkov [2015-05-13 12:48 +0100]: > I am booting without initramfs, using a plan9 filesystem as rootfs in a kvm. > > Thus my /proc/cmdline has: > root=/dev/root rootflags=rw,trans=virtio,version=9p2000.L rootfstype=9p > > # mount > /dev/root on / type 9p > (rw,relatime,syn

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

On 13 May 2015 at 13:43, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Wed, 13.05.15 12:48, Dimitri John Ledkov (dimitri.j.led...@intel.com) > wrote: > >> I am booting without initramfs, using a plan9 filesystem as rootfs in a kvm. >> >> Thus my /proc/cmdline has: >> root=/dev/root rootflags=rw,trans=virtio,ver

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

On Wed, 13.05.15 12:48, Dimitri John Ledkov (dimitri.j.led...@intel.com) wrote: > I am booting without initramfs, using a plan9 filesystem as rootfs in a kvm. > > Thus my /proc/cmdline has: > root=/dev/root rootflags=rw,trans=virtio,version=9p2000.L rootfstype=9p > > # mount > /dev/root on / typ

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

Heya, On 13 May 2015 at 12:53, Martin Pitt wrote: > Hey Dimitri, > > Dimitri John Ledkov [2015-05-13 12:48 +0100]: >> Yet, dev-root.device is dead: >> # systemctl status dev-root.device >> ● dev-root.device >>Loaded: loaded >>Active: inactive (dead) >> >> This is very bad. As a harmless a

Re: [systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

Hey Dimitri, Dimitri John Ledkov [2015-05-13 12:48 +0100]: > Yet, dev-root.device is dead: > # systemctl status dev-root.device > ● dev-root.device >Loaded: loaded >Active: inactive (dead) > > This is very bad. As a harmless action like following: > > # mount --bind /opt /opt > > Result

[systemd-devel] dev-root.device is not active, results in an umount spree

I am booting without initramfs, using a plan9 filesystem as rootfs in a kvm. Thus my /proc/cmdline has: root=/dev/root rootflags=rw,trans=virtio,version=9p2000.L rootfstype=9p # mount /dev/root on / type 9p (rw,relatime,sync,dirsync,rw,trans=virtio,version=9p2000.L) Yet, dev-root.device is dead: