[Bug 1145007] New: Kernel 4.12.14-lp151.28.10-default unable to mount with -o mand
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145007 Bug ID: 1145007 Summary: Kernel 4.12.14-lp151.28.10-default unable to mount with -o mand Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Distribution Version: Leap 15.1 Hardware: x86-64 OS: SUSE Other Status: NEW Severity: Critical Priority: P5 - None Component: Kernel Assignee: kernel-maintainers@forge.provo.novell.com Reporter: fuhs@tak.de QA Contact: qa-bugs@suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- With Kernel Version 4.12.14-lp151.28.10-default it's not possible to mount a ext4 disk with Mandatory Locking enabled. After boot, the filesystem is mounted read-only and without the 'mand' option. In this case this was the root filesystem! Kernel 4.4.162-78-default works like it should! If you try to manual mount another ext4 disk, you get a simple 'Access denied' message. mount /dev/xvdd1 -o mand /test mount: /test: Zugriff verweigert. Manual mount with the '4.4.162-78-default works'. Unfortunately there is no more logging information to find. We use Xen 4.12.0_12-lp151.1 on SuSE 15.1 as host and and the domU with the problem is a 'pv' SuSE 15.1. # /etc/fstab /dev/xvda1 / ext4 acl,mand,user_xattr 1 1 The domU was running 42.3 with these settings before. After the upgrade to 15.1 AND with kernel 4.12.14-lp151.28.10-default it doesn't work anymore. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145007 Chris F <fuhs@tak.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fuhs@tak.de -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145007 Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jack@suse.com, | |tiwai@suse.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145007 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145007#c1 Jan Kara <jack@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|P5 - None |P3 - Medium Status|NEW |IN_PROGRESS Assignee|kernel-maintainers@forge.pr |jack@suse.com |ovo.novell.com | Flags| |needinfo?(fuhs@tak.de) --- Comment #1 from Jan Kara <jack@suse.com> --- This is a result of commit 9e8925b67a80: locks: Allow disabling mandatory locking at compile time Mandatory locking appears to be almost unused and buggy and there appears no real interest in doing anything with it. Since effectively no one uses the code and since the code is buggy let's allow it to be disabled at compile time. I would just suggest removing the code but undoubtedly that will break some piece of userspace code somewhere. For the distributions that don't care about this piece of code this gives a nice starting point to make mandatory locking go away. So I suppose not supporting mandatory locking anymore was a deliberate decision. This is actually nothing ext4 specific - rather a generic VFS change. Do you really use mandatory locking or was that just a leftover from the past? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145007 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145007#c2 --- Comment #2 from Chris F <fuhs@tak.de> --- (In reply to Jan Kara from comment #1)
This is a result of commit 9e8925b67a80:
locks: Allow disabling mandatory locking at compile time
Mandatory locking appears to be almost unused and buggy and there appears no real interest in doing anything with it. Since effectively no one uses the code and since the code is buggy let's allow it to be disabled at compile time. I would just suggest removing the code but undoubtedly that will break some piece of userspace code somewhere.
For the distributions that don't care about this piece of code this gives a nice starting point to make mandatory locking go away.
So I suppose not supporting mandatory locking anymore was a deliberate decision. This is actually nothing ext4 specific - rather a generic VFS change.
Do you really use mandatory locking or was that just a leftover from the past?
Hi, we used the havp -http Anti Virus Proxy for years. Unfortunately one of the requirements is "You HAVE TO use mandatory locks on your scanning filesystem!" -> http://www.havp.org/downloads/ After upgrading Leap 42.3 -> 15.1 the root fs boots in readonly. Not cool. There is no warning about 'buggy' in the man page 'mount(8). Anyhow, we don't use havp anymore. We switched to squidclamav as http virus proxy, so we don't need mandatoy locking anymore. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145007 http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145007#c3 --- Comment #3 from Jan Kara <jack@suse.com> --- Yeah, I agree that the documentation is clearly lacking. I'll talk to respective people to improve that. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145007 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1145007#c4 Jan Kara <jack@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|IN_PROGRESS |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Jan Kara <jack@suse.com> --- The mandatory locking has been fully deprecated upstream now. Also manpages have been updated accordingly and the kernel emits warning messages. I think we can close this one. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
participants (2)
-
bugzilla_noreply＠novell.com -
bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com