> Activating the LVs (that ubuntu's rule does) is perhaps not a bad thing. But
> the problem is that this is done within the context of udev event
> processing, which may cause the udev event processing to get stuck.
So I wonder if it would suffice to fire off the vgchange call asynchronously,
so that vgchange can then spin on the lock while the udev rule proceeds to
exit. Then vgchange can proceed when udev drops the lv lock.
Does that make any sense? It might mess up the use off watershed though.
Quoting Alex Lyakas (<email address hidden>):
Thanks for the information, Alex.
> Activating the LVs (that ubuntu's rule does) is perhaps not a bad thing. But
> the problem is that this is done within the context of udev event
> processing, which may cause the udev event processing to get stuck.
So I wonder if it would suffice to fire off the vgchange call asynchronously,
so that vgchange can then spin on the lock while the udev rule proceeds to
exit. Then vgchange can proceed when udev drops the lv lock.
Does that make any sense? It might mess up the use off watershed though.