As mentioned, the long delay at boot is definitely experienced by users including me that have their root fs on LVM. The --no-udevsync workaround fixes the issue that apparently started with the update to 3.00-14. Personally, I suspect that some problem was present even before 3.00-14 but occurring so rarely that one was not noticing it (e.g. 1 slow boot every 100). With 3.00-14 the hang at boot became sistematic.
As the original reporter of Bug #902491, I really hope that it can get some attention (e.g., currently this bug has a 'high' importance and that one a 'medium' one and most important this thread seems to host a technical discussion). Note that all those on 902491 see that the --no-udevsync workaround fixes the issue. Also note that following a (possibly wrong) hint on my side 902491 was closed as a duplicate of the current bug.
For the time being, following the comment by Steve I am re-opeining 902491 by removing the duplicate status. Please let me know if it is more appropriate to leave 902491 closed and open a new "vgchange may deadlock in initramfs when VG present that's used for rootfs"
As mentioned, the long delay at boot is definitely experienced by users including me that have their root fs on LVM. The --no-udevsync workaround fixes the issue that apparently started with the update to 3.00-14. Personally, I suspect that some problem was present even before 3.00-14 but occurring so rarely that one was not noticing it (e.g. 1 slow boot every 100). With 3.00-14 the hang at boot became sistematic.
As the original reporter of Bug #902491, I really hope that it can get some attention (e.g., currently this bug has a 'high' importance and that one a 'medium' one and most important this thread seems to host a technical discussion). Note that all those on 902491 see that the --no-udevsync workaround fixes the issue. Also note that following a (possibly wrong) hint on my side 902491 was closed as a duplicate of the current bug.
For the time being, following the comment by Steve I am re-opeining 902491 by removing the duplicate status. Please let me know if it is more appropriate to leave 902491 closed and open a new "vgchange may deadlock in initramfs when VG present that's used for rootfs"