<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW --- - udevd flock() failure on disk partitions due to fsck holding WRITE FLOCK"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=79576#c7">Comment # 7</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW --- - udevd flock() failure on disk partitions due to fsck holding WRITE FLOCK"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=79576">bug 79576</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:jpsinthemix@verizon.net" title="jpsinthemix@verizon.net">jpsinthemix@verizon.net</a>
</span></b>
<pre>Just a thought: If util-linux's fsck doesn't need to lock the whole disk (or a
partition for that matter) then, of course, it shouldn't; likewise, for udev.
It definitely makes sense to me that udev should lock devices when processing
(at least some) rules related to them. However, simply modifying fsck really
won't fix the fundamental problem here, which is that udev should be able work
around an existing lock (within reason of course) to carry out (rather than
skip) rule processing, perhaps by waiting, or postponing and trying later.. I'm
looking at udevd.c to see if there's a reasonable way of doing something along
these lines, but it kinda rough going..</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>