On Fri, 27.02.15 17:13, Lennart Poettering (lenn...@poettering.net) wrote: > On Thu, 26.02.15 16:50, Martin Pitt (martin.p...@ubuntu.com) wrote: > > > IMHO it would be prudent to skip adding the BindsTo= if at the time of > > creating the .mount unit the backing .device unit doesn't actually > > exist. In that case it's a mount which isn't managed by systemd, and > > we shouldn't touch it. We mostly want this BindsTo= for mounts where > > the .device units *do* exist, so that when they go away we can clean > > up the mount (mostly for hotpluggable devices and removable media). > > I'll have a deeper look ASAP. > > I ran into this myself the other day, and Kay, Daniel and I spent a > lot of time to come up with a scheme how to deal with the race... And > I think we have a nice scheme now and I started implementing it. > > The idea is that .device units will gain a third state: currently they > are either "dead" or "plugged", and the new state will be > "tentative". It is entered when a device is referenced in > /proc/self/mountinfo or /proc/swap, even though it has not yet shown > up via udev. > > This new state has will not result in BindsTo= getting active.
This is implemented now. Please check if this fixes this issue for you. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
