This reverts commit 86a03bee1d.
Since now our "mount -oloop" creates AUTOCLEARed loopdevs, we no longer
need our umount to destroy loopdevs to match the usual util-linux behaviour.
Now this revert fixes another, opposite bug: "explicit" mount /dev/loopN
and then umount must not drop loopdevs!
User complaint is as follows:
It seems LOOP_CLR_FD called on a loop-*partition* removes the mapping of
the whole *device* - which results in the following:
root@LEDE:/# loop=$(losetup -f)
root@LEDE:/# echo ${loop}
/dev/loop2
root@LEDE:/# losetup ${loop} /IMAGE
root@LEDE:/# ls -l ${loop}*
brw------- 1 root root 7, 2 Mar 6 20:09 /dev/loop2
root@LEDE:/# partprobe ${loop}
root@LEDE:/# ls -l ${loop}*
brw------- 1 root root 7, 2 Mar 6 20:09 /dev/loop2
brw------- 1 root root 259, 8 Mar 6 21:59 /dev/loop2p1
brw------- 1 root root 259, 9 Mar 6 21:59 /dev/loop2p2
brw------- 1 root root 259, 10 Mar 6 21:59 /dev/loop2p3
brw------- 1 root root 259, 11 Mar 6 21:59 /dev/loop2p4
brw------- 1 root root 259, 12 Mar 6 21:59 /dev/loop2p5
brw------- 1 root root 259, 13 Mar 6 21:59 /dev/loop2p6
brw------- 1 root root 259, 14 Mar 6 21:59 /dev/loop2p7
brw------- 1 root root 259, 15 Mar 6 21:59 /dev/loop2p8
root@LEDE:/# mount ${loop}p8 /MOUNT # mount loop partition
root@LEDE:/# losetup -a | grep $loop # loop dev mapping still there
/dev/loop2: 0 /mnt/IMAGE
root@LEDE:/# strace umount /MOUNT 2> /log # unmount loop partition
root@LEDE:/# losetup -a | grep ${loop} # loop device mapping is gone
root@LEDE:/# grep -i loop /log
open("/dev/loop2p7", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3
ioctl(3, LOOP_CLR_FD) = 0
root@LEDE:/#
The strace was done to figure out, if maybe umount wrongly ioctl()'s the
parent device instead of the partition - it doesn't.
I already wasn't a fan of umount implicitly removing the mapping in the
first place (as I usually setup and release loop devices with `losetup`
and scripts needed to call umount differently in order to work and
outside busybox).
However taking above (kernel-)behaviour into account - umount calling
ioctl(LOOP_CLR_FD) unconditionally potentially causes some nasty side
effects
Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@googlemail.com>
a98db793cf