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?










share|improve this question




















  • 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















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?










share|improve this question




















  • 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













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?










share|improve this question















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






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Jan 5 '16 at 16:05

























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














  • 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










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...






share|improve this answer





















  • 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











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















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

























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...






share|improve this answer





















  • 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















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...






share|improve this answer





















  • 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













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...






share|improve this answer












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...







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










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


















  • 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


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































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.




draft saved


draft discarded














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





















































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







Popular posts from this blog

Accessing regular linux commands in Huawei's Dopra Linux

Can't connect RFCOMM socket: Host is down

Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal Exception in Interrupt