A stop job is running for LVM
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
I use full disk encryption which uses an LVM. It uses like this in lsblk:
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 465,8G 0 disk
├─sda1 8:1 0 200M 0 part /boot/efi
├─sda2 8:2 0 500M 0 part /boot
└─sda3 8:3 0 465,1G 0 part
└─luks-3f530000-b2c3-4ba3-9e85-1a96494cc25d 253:0 0 465,1G 0 crypt
├─fedora_martin--friese-root 253:1 0 50G 0 lvm /
├─fedora_martin--friese-swap 253:2 0 7,8G 0 lvm [SWAP]
└─fedora_martin--friese-home 253:3 0 407,3G 0 lvm /home
The same setup I had with Ubuntu for several non-LTE releases as well. On the first installation, it worked fine on both Ubuntu (say 14.10) and now Fedora 22. When I upgraded the Ubuntu I occasionally had with issue (around 15.04 I'd say). On Fedora 22 it was not a problem until the upgrade to Fedora 23. Now I have the A stop job is running errors.
In total there a couple errors that cycle through (except that the time is increasing):
- (1 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (2 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (3 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (4 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (5 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- More of them. I did not get to make pictures of all of them. But with the pattern I assume that number 6 and 7 are the same type.
- (8 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / no limit)
The last one has no time limit, which is interesting. After the timeout is over, it dumps a couple more messages and leaves me with the following:
http://chaos.stw-bonn.de/users/mu/uploads/2015-11-27/LVM-Fehler-7.jpg
From the last line it seems that it cannot properly unmount and luksClose the encrypted volumes.
My setup is just plain Awesome WM (and has been that on Fedora 22 as well). I usually log off in Awesome wM and then click the poweroff button in SDDM, the display manager. That way I do not have to enter systemctl poweroff and I have the hope that all my user programs are closed before the shutdown starts.
What can I do to find the thing that blocks the proper closing of the LVM crypto devices?
Update 2016-01-05
I have uploaded a log from the whole shutdown. In the end it does say that it was not able to close the device as it was busy but I do not see why it has been busy. What is the cause for this?
ubuntu fedora lvm disk-encryption
asked Nov 27 '15 at 8:19
Martin Ueding
1,28311127
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
I use full disk encryption which uses an LVM. It uses like this in lsblk:
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 465,8G 0 disk
├─sda1 8:1 0 200M 0 part /boot/efi
├─sda2 8:2 0 500M 0 part /boot
└─sda3 8:3 0 465,1G 0 part
└─luks-3f530000-b2c3-4ba3-9e85-1a96494cc25d 253:0 0 465,1G 0 crypt
├─fedora_martin--friese-root 253:1 0 50G 0 lvm /
├─fedora_martin--friese-swap 253:2 0 7,8G 0 lvm [SWAP]
└─fedora_martin--friese-home 253:3 0 407,3G 0 lvm /home
The same setup I had with Ubuntu for several non-LTE releases as well. On the first installation, it worked fine on both Ubuntu (say 14.10) and now Fedora 22. When I upgraded the Ubuntu I occasionally had with issue (around 15.04 I'd say). On Fedora 22 it was not a problem until the upgrade to Fedora 23. Now I have the A stop job is running errors.
In total there a couple errors that cycle through (except that the time is increasing):
- (1 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (2 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (3 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (4 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (5 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- More of them. I did not get to make pictures of all of them. But with the pattern I assume that number 6 and 7 are the same type.
- (8 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / no limit)
The last one has no time limit, which is interesting. After the timeout is over, it dumps a couple more messages and leaves me with the following:
http://chaos.stw-bonn.de/users/mu/uploads/2015-11-27/LVM-Fehler-7.jpg
From the last line it seems that it cannot properly unmount and luksClose the encrypted volumes.
My setup is just plain Awesome WM (and has been that on Fedora 22 as well). I usually log off in Awesome wM and then click the poweroff button in SDDM, the display manager. That way I do not have to enter systemctl poweroff and I have the hope that all my user programs are closed before the shutdown starts.
What can I do to find the thing that blocks the proper closing of the LVM crypto devices?
Update 2016-01-05
I have uploaded a log from the whole shutdown. In the end it does say that it was not able to close the device as it was busy but I do not see why it has been busy. What is the cause for this?
ubuntu fedora lvm disk-encryption
asked Nov 27 '15 at 8:19
Martin Ueding
1,28311127
1
I've the same problem on Debian Stretch.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 3 '16 at 14:01
Do you use VirtualBox? I sometimes see that the first job is actually something about installation of kmods and VirtualBox has one of those.
– Martin Ueding
Feb 3 '16 at 17:20
Nope. It's a pure vanilla Debian from their current Stretch netinst with updates applied. It's running on a Dell XPS 13 9350 so maybe some issues with the nvme support or something. It's running GNOME btw, not sure if GNOME programs have the privileges to create this sort of headache, maybe GDM or whatever.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 5 '16 at 18:33
I've never encountered this problem when I just type reboot from a root shell in text mode, but I do get an error if I type reboot from a root shell in GNOME. It's probably supposed to be systemctl reboot or something.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 5 '16 at 18:37
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
I use full disk encryption which uses an LVM. It uses like this in lsblk:
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 465,8G 0 disk
├─sda1 8:1 0 200M 0 part /boot/efi
├─sda2 8:2 0 500M 0 part /boot
└─sda3 8:3 0 465,1G 0 part
└─luks-3f530000-b2c3-4ba3-9e85-1a96494cc25d 253:0 0 465,1G 0 crypt
├─fedora_martin--friese-root 253:1 0 50G 0 lvm /
├─fedora_martin--friese-swap 253:2 0 7,8G 0 lvm [SWAP]
└─fedora_martin--friese-home 253:3 0 407,3G 0 lvm /home
The same setup I had with Ubuntu for several non-LTE releases as well. On the first installation, it worked fine on both Ubuntu (say 14.10) and now Fedora 22. When I upgraded the Ubuntu I occasionally had with issue (around 15.04 I'd say). On Fedora 22 it was not a problem until the upgrade to Fedora 23. Now I have the A stop job is running errors.
In total there a couple errors that cycle through (except that the time is increasing):
- (1 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (2 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (3 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (4 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (5 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- More of them. I did not get to make pictures of all of them. But with the pattern I assume that number 6 and 7 are the same type.
- (8 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / no limit)
The last one has no time limit, which is interesting. After the timeout is over, it dumps a couple more messages and leaves me with the following:
http://chaos.stw-bonn.de/users/mu/uploads/2015-11-27/LVM-Fehler-7.jpg
From the last line it seems that it cannot properly unmount and luksClose the encrypted volumes.
My setup is just plain Awesome WM (and has been that on Fedora 22 as well). I usually log off in Awesome wM and then click the poweroff button in SDDM, the display manager. That way I do not have to enter systemctl poweroff and I have the hope that all my user programs are closed before the shutdown starts.
What can I do to find the thing that blocks the proper closing of the LVM crypto devices?
Update 2016-01-05
I have uploaded a log from the whole shutdown. In the end it does say that it was not able to close the device as it was busy but I do not see why it has been busy. What is the cause for this?
ubuntu fedora lvm disk-encryption
asked Nov 27 '15 at 8:19
Martin Ueding
1,28311127
I use full disk encryption which uses an LVM. It uses like this in lsblk:
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda 8:0 0 465,8G 0 disk
├─sda1 8:1 0 200M 0 part /boot/efi
├─sda2 8:2 0 500M 0 part /boot
└─sda3 8:3 0 465,1G 0 part
└─luks-3f530000-b2c3-4ba3-9e85-1a96494cc25d 253:0 0 465,1G 0 crypt
├─fedora_martin--friese-root 253:1 0 50G 0 lvm /
├─fedora_martin--friese-swap 253:2 0 7,8G 0 lvm [SWAP]
└─fedora_martin--friese-home 253:3 0 407,3G 0 lvm /home
The same setup I had with Ubuntu for several non-LTE releases as well. On the first installation, it worked fine on both Ubuntu (say 14.10) and now Fedora 22. When I upgraded the Ubuntu I occasionally had with issue (around 15.04 I'd say). On Fedora 22 it was not a problem until the upgrade to Fedora 23. Now I have the A stop job is running errors.
In total there a couple errors that cycle through (except that the time is increasing):
- (1 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (2 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (3 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (4 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- (5 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / 1min 30s)
- More of them. I did not get to make pictures of all of them. But with the pattern I assume that number 6 and 7 are the same type.
- (8 of 8) A stop job is running for LVM PV NVB… on /dev/dm-0 (20 s / no limit)
The last one has no time limit, which is interesting. After the timeout is over, it dumps a couple more messages and leaves me with the following:
http://chaos.stw-bonn.de/users/mu/uploads/2015-11-27/LVM-Fehler-7.jpg
From the last line it seems that it cannot properly unmount and luksClose the encrypted volumes.
My setup is just plain Awesome WM (and has been that on Fedora 22 as well). I usually log off in Awesome wM and then click the poweroff button in SDDM, the display manager. That way I do not have to enter systemctl poweroff and I have the hope that all my user programs are closed before the shutdown starts.
What can I do to find the thing that blocks the proper closing of the LVM crypto devices?
Update 2016-01-05
I have uploaded a log from the whole shutdown. In the end it does say that it was not able to close the device as it was busy but I do not see why it has been busy. What is the cause for this?
ubuntu fedora lvm disk-encryption
ubuntu fedora lvm disk-encryption
asked Nov 27 '15 at 8:19
Martin Ueding
1,28311127
asked Nov 27 '15 at 8:19
Martin Ueding
1,28311127
edited Jan 5 '16 at 16:05
asked Nov 27 '15 at 8:19
Martin Ueding
1,28311127
asked Nov 27 '15 at 8:19
Martin Ueding
1,28311127
asked Nov 27 '15 at 8:19
Martin Ueding
1,28311127
1,28311127
1
I've the same problem on Debian Stretch.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 3 '16 at 14:01
Do you use VirtualBox? I sometimes see that the first job is actually something about installation of kmods and VirtualBox has one of those.
– Martin Ueding
Feb 3 '16 at 17:20
Nope. It's a pure vanilla Debian from their current Stretch netinst with updates applied. It's running on a Dell XPS 13 9350 so maybe some issues with the nvme support or something. It's running GNOME btw, not sure if GNOME programs have the privileges to create this sort of headache, maybe GDM or whatever.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 5 '16 at 18:33
I've never encountered this problem when I just type reboot from a root shell in text mode, but I do get an error if I type reboot from a root shell in GNOME. It's probably supposed to be systemctl reboot or something.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 5 '16 at 18:37
add a comment |
1
I've the same problem on Debian Stretch.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 3 '16 at 14:01
Do you use VirtualBox? I sometimes see that the first job is actually something about installation of kmods and VirtualBox has one of those.
– Martin Ueding
Feb 3 '16 at 17:20
Nope. It's a pure vanilla Debian from their current Stretch netinst with updates applied. It's running on a Dell XPS 13 9350 so maybe some issues with the nvme support or something. It's running GNOME btw, not sure if GNOME programs have the privileges to create this sort of headache, maybe GDM or whatever.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 5 '16 at 18:33
I've never encountered this problem when I just type reboot from a root shell in text mode, but I do get an error if I type reboot from a root shell in GNOME. It's probably supposed to be systemctl reboot or something.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 5 '16 at 18:37
1
1
I've the same problem on Debian Stretch.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 3 '16 at 14:01
I've the same problem on Debian Stretch.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 3 '16 at 14:01
Do you use VirtualBox? I sometimes see that the first job is actually something about installation of kmods and VirtualBox has one of those.
– Martin Ueding
Feb 3 '16 at 17:20
Do you use VirtualBox? I sometimes see that the first job is actually something about installation of kmods and VirtualBox has one of those.
– Martin Ueding
Feb 3 '16 at 17:20
Nope. It's a pure vanilla Debian from their current Stretch netinst with updates applied. It's running on a Dell XPS 13 9350 so maybe some issues with the nvme support or something. It's running GNOME btw, not sure if GNOME programs have the privileges to create this sort of headache, maybe GDM or whatever.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 5 '16 at 18:33
Nope. It's a pure vanilla Debian from their current Stretch netinst with updates applied. It's running on a Dell XPS 13 9350 so maybe some issues with the nvme support or something. It's running GNOME btw, not sure if GNOME programs have the privileges to create this sort of headache, maybe GDM or whatever.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 5 '16 at 18:33
I've never encountered this problem when I just type reboot from a root shell in text mode, but I do get an error if I type reboot from a root shell in GNOME. It's probably supposed to be systemctl reboot or something.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 5 '16 at 18:37
I've never encountered this problem when I just type reboot from a root shell in text mode, but I do get an error if I type reboot from a root shell in GNOME. It's probably supposed to be systemctl reboot or something.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 5 '16 at 18:37
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
This seems related to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1299178.
If I read this properly it's because the setup of LVM on top of encrypted device isn't well supported by systemd !? This surprises me because, well, it seems like an obvious setup to me. Encrypt a big partition, then split it into as many logical partitions as desired, seems easier than the other way around...
answered Aug 29 '17 at 9:46
David Faure
1213
Yes, it's not like I had invented this, the Fedora installer (Anaconda) did that setup for me. So I doubt that I am the only one using this configuration. The bug report is interesting, thanks for pointing me to it.
– Martin Ueding
Aug 30 '17 at 20:28
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
This seems related to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1299178.
If I read this properly it's because the setup of LVM on top of encrypted device isn't well supported by systemd !? This surprises me because, well, it seems like an obvious setup to me. Encrypt a big partition, then split it into as many logical partitions as desired, seems easier than the other way around...
answered Aug 29 '17 at 9:46
David Faure
1213
Yes, it's not like I had invented this, the Fedora installer (Anaconda) did that setup for me. So I doubt that I am the only one using this configuration. The bug report is interesting, thanks for pointing me to it.
– Martin Ueding
Aug 30 '17 at 20:28
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
This seems related to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1299178.
If I read this properly it's because the setup of LVM on top of encrypted device isn't well supported by systemd !? This surprises me because, well, it seems like an obvious setup to me. Encrypt a big partition, then split it into as many logical partitions as desired, seems easier than the other way around...
answered Aug 29 '17 at 9:46
David Faure
1213
Yes, it's not like I had invented this, the Fedora installer (Anaconda) did that setup for me. So I doubt that I am the only one using this configuration. The bug report is interesting, thanks for pointing me to it.
– Martin Ueding
Aug 30 '17 at 20:28
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
This seems related to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1299178.
If I read this properly it's because the setup of LVM on top of encrypted device isn't well supported by systemd !? This surprises me because, well, it seems like an obvious setup to me. Encrypt a big partition, then split it into as many logical partitions as desired, seems easier than the other way around...
answered Aug 29 '17 at 9:46
David Faure
1213
This seems related to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1299178.
If I read this properly it's because the setup of LVM on top of encrypted device isn't well supported by systemd !? This surprises me because, well, it seems like an obvious setup to me. Encrypt a big partition, then split it into as many logical partitions as desired, seems easier than the other way around...
answered Aug 29 '17 at 9:46
David Faure
1213
answered Aug 29 '17 at 9:46
David Faure
1213
answered Aug 29 '17 at 9:46
David Faure
1213
answered Aug 29 '17 at 9:46
David Faure
1213
1213
Yes, it's not like I had invented this, the Fedora installer (Anaconda) did that setup for me. So I doubt that I am the only one using this configuration. The bug report is interesting, thanks for pointing me to it.
– Martin Ueding
Aug 30 '17 at 20:28
add a comment |
Yes, it's not like I had invented this, the Fedora installer (Anaconda) did that setup for me. So I doubt that I am the only one using this configuration. The bug report is interesting, thanks for pointing me to it.
– Martin Ueding
Aug 30 '17 at 20:28
Yes, it's not like I had invented this, the Fedora installer (Anaconda) did that setup for me. So I doubt that I am the only one using this configuration. The bug report is interesting, thanks for pointing me to it.
– Martin Ueding
Aug 30 '17 at 20:28
Yes, it's not like I had invented this, the Fedora installer (Anaconda) did that setup for me. So I doubt that I am the only one using this configuration. The bug report is interesting, thanks for pointing me to it.
– Martin Ueding
Aug 30 '17 at 20:28
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f245829%2fa-stop-job-is-running-for-lvm%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
I've the same problem on Debian Stretch.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 3 '16 at 14:01
Do you use VirtualBox? I sometimes see that the first job is actually something about installation of kmods and VirtualBox has one of those.
– Martin Ueding
Feb 3 '16 at 17:20
Nope. It's a pure vanilla Debian from their current Stretch netinst with updates applied. It's running on a Dell XPS 13 9350 so maybe some issues with the nvme support or something. It's running GNOME btw, not sure if GNOME programs have the privileges to create this sort of headache, maybe GDM or whatever.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 5 '16 at 18:33
I've never encountered this problem when I just type reboot from a root shell in text mode, but I do get an error if I type reboot from a root shell in GNOME. It's probably supposed to be systemctl reboot or something.
– Jeff Burdges
Feb 5 '16 at 18:37