Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 212629
Mounting ReiserFS (3.6) partitions from /etc/fstab during boot hard locks the system
Last modified: 2015-01-04 17:29:15 EST
Description of problem:
When a ReiserFS partition is present in /etc/fstab, the system will hard lock
(requiring pressing of reset button) when trying to mount them, with a message
Mount: Operation not permitted/supported (or something along those lines in
English, original line in Spanish: Mount: Operación no soportada). This has
happened in both IDE ATAPI drives and S-ATA drives, so S-ATA drivers are not an
issue. However, once the system has booted, the partitions can be mounted
normally as root from any command prompt. The same happens if the partitions are
mounted from the /etc/rc.d/rc.local file, which is processed at the end of the
initialization sequence. Even there, the same message appears, and the system
locks up. Nothing is responsinve, you can't swtch VT's, or ctrl+alt+del,
nothing. Only pressing of the reset button is possible. At the moment I have to
disable all the RiserFS partitions using the rescue mode. Also fsck.reiserfs in
rescue mode segfaults for some reason at the very end of any check process.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
I'm not sure the component at fault here is either the initscripts package, the
reiserfs-utils package or the kernel itself. In any case, here are the versions
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Create a ReiserFS partition and format it as ReiserFS 3.6
2. Add the partition to the /etc/fstab file
The system hard locks, resulting in a needed reboot into rescue mode to disable
the partitions from the file. The partitions can be mounted once the system has
booted, but not during boot.
For the partitions to be able to be mounted when the system is booting up.
If it's locking the system, that's a kernel issue, not an initscripts issue.
What I don't understand is why after boot, the partitions can be mounted. I'll
try with a vanilla kernel and see if the problem is still present there. One
question, though. Does the new Fedora Kernel has the extra security flags
enabled for ReiserFS by default? (IIRC, the FC5 kernel does not)... Just shot in
the dark, but could this problem be due to that?
Confirmed!, the extra attributes present in the Fedora Kernel for the Reiser
Filesystem (ReiserFS) are the responsibles for this problem occuring. The only
solution I see for now is to remove these extra attributes from the
configuration, or to re-format the partitions... Or is there a way to make the
partitions use the extra attributes even when they were formatted with a driver
which did not have these? I'm trying to find out about this, in the mean time,
these are the configuration flags that the official kernel has, that the custom
kernel I'm currently running does not:
# CONFIG_REISERFS_CHECK is not set
This is the configuration that worked for me:
# CONFIG_REISERFS_CHECK is not set
# CONFIG_REISERFS_FS_XATTR is not set
So yes, it is a kernel problem, but it may also be a partition's flag problem,
so how could I set the proper flag into the partitions to avoid this problem
from happening? (Or will I be better off rebuilding the official kernel with
those flags disabled?)
Your best bet is to report this upstream (email@example.com).
Introduction of XATTRs should not have prevented mounting non-xattr aware
As reiserfs is completely unsupported by Fedora, this needs to be brought to the
attention of those responsible for its maintainence.
Thank you very much. I'll try to get this to the persons responsible.
Just to add, that upon further investigation this seems to be related to
SELinux, and as a quick "workaround" disabling SELinux will allow mounting
ReiserFS partitions with the official kernel, with support for XATTR in the
RieserFS driver. I'm not sure yet where's the problem, if in SELinux way of
tagging the filesystem (as it seems even when the driver supports XATTR an
option is passed to mount which is not recognized by the driver, and hence the
error). Is there any special options SELinux passes to mount when a filesystem
is tagged? If so, which are they?