teknoraver / rpms / systemd

Forked from rpms/systemd 2 months ago
Clone

Blame SOURCES/0564-Revert-udev-run-link_update-with-increased-retry-cou.patch

b677e7
From 1afb38f39a9b4508533cc1c7262e5fff418cb317 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
b677e7
From: Michal Sekletar <msekleta@redhat.com>
b677e7
Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 15:49:08 +0200
b677e7
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "udev: run link_update() with increased retry count in
b677e7
 second invocation"
b677e7
b677e7
This reverts commit 1f3165bda13c8572c8c31d23c998835c4e2ad8f3.
b677e7
b677e7
Related: #1942299
b677e7
---
b677e7
 src/udev/udev-event.c | 3 ++-
b677e7
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
b677e7
b677e7
diff --git a/src/udev/udev-event.c b/src/udev/udev-event.c
b677e7
index eaec05523b..9004634f65 100644
b677e7
--- a/src/udev/udev-event.c
b677e7
+++ b/src/udev/udev-event.c
b677e7
@@ -934,13 +934,14 @@ void udev_event_execute_rules(struct udev_event *event,
b677e7
                 /* (re)write database file */
b677e7
                 udev_device_tag_index(dev, event->dev_db, true);
b677e7
                 udev_device_update_db(dev);
b677e7
-                udev_device_set_is_initialized(dev);
b677e7
 
b677e7
                 /* Yes, we run update_devnode() twice, because in the first invocation, that is before update of udev database,
b677e7
                  * it could happen that two contenders are replacing each other's symlink. Hence we run it again to make sure
b677e7
                  * symlinks point to devices that claim them with the highest priority. */
b677e7
                 update_devnode(event);
b677e7
 
b677e7
+                udev_device_set_is_initialized(dev);
b677e7
+
b677e7
                 event->dev_db = udev_device_unref(event->dev_db);
b677e7
         }
b677e7
 }