Bug#401916: Bug #401916 - any progress?
On Fri, February 23, 2007 16:28, maximilian attems said:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 03:05:44PM +0100, David Härdeman wrote:
>> Exactly, considering the low amount of complaints, I'd say there's a
>> tiny minority that is actually affected by this bug.
>>
>> Secondly, there is no way to have the bandaid-wait for usb-storage users
>> only, instead it would hit every computer with usb port (i.e. the vast
>> majority).
>
> hmm i thought there was just from looking at the init scripts
> you or mikap posted..
No, unfortunately it seems that the times between loading the usb host
controller, loading usb-storage and spawning the usb-storage-scan thread
are all asynchronous. So we can't really know how long time we need to
wait for any of those stages.
>> Since you're busy, I'll do another patch which implements the rootwait
>> parameter during the weekend. Question is, should I completely remove
>> the
>> wait from the premount stage (where it is now) and move it to the udev
>> stage, or should it be duplicated?
>
> don't remove it as the udev rootdelay is optional as bootparam.
> we want a small diff too ;)
So just to make sure: you want the use of the rootdelay parameter to be
added to the udev script and kept in the initramfs script (i.e. used
twice)?
In that case if you specify "rootdelay=5", the boot will pause in the udev
stage and then again after the premount stage (before the actual mount).
The dual wait is probably no big deal of course...since it adds a few
seconds to some exotic boot scenarios only. I'll start working on this...
--
David Härdeman
Reply to: