Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Loop device is created with autoclear flag, so it is autoremoved, no remove ctl
needed.
Only if this functionality is not available, then you have to remove loop
device manually. This is documented (see man cryptsetup "NOTES ON LOOPBACK
DEVICE USE" - I think I forgot to add this note to veritysetup man page as
well).
What is your kernel version? Why is loop autoremoval not working? (Paste
veritysetup command with --debug switch please.)
Original comment by gmazyl...@gmail.com
on 30 Aug 2013 at 9:28
[deleted comment]
I have Ubuntu 12.10 kernel 3.5.0-39-generic now (I had 3.5.0.36 when it
happened).
However I cannot reproduce my error anymore (and don't want to downgrade again
for this).
I deleted my earlier comment since I was using an old libcryptsetup and some
weird errors out of that.
Since I cannot reproduce the problem, I guess this bug can be closed.
P.S. I was wondering, if these two error-behaviours for small verity-devices
was intended:
data_device size between 0 and 511: Header detected but device ./file1 is too
small.
data_device size between 512 and 8191: Error during update of verity header on
device ./file2.
(Especially the second Error was somewhat misleading for me)
Original comment by AndreasFuchsSIT
on 2 Sep 2013 at 9:31
The loop device allocation and autoremoval iotcl must work - if not it, is bug
in kernel and should be fixed.
(Sequential /dev/loop* scan is just fallback for old kernels.)
For the device size - loop device it kind of tricky, its size must be at least
one sector (512 bytes) otherwise loop doesn't work properly.
Losetup has the same problem - try to map file < 512 bytes with it. The same
applies for the last incomplete sector in file. It is because loop is block
device and atomic unit for access block device is sector but for file it is one
byte.
The second error message is strange, I think at least error message is wrong.
Please, if you want, create new issue for this.
(I will check it once I have more time for it.)
Thanks!
Original comment by gmazyl...@gmail.com
on 2 Sep 2013 at 5:12
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
AndreasFuchsSIT
on 30 Aug 2013 at 8:42