lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 24 Feb 2020 19:31:06 +0800
From:   "zhangyi (F)" <>
To:     Eryu Guan <>
CC:     <>, <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4/021: make sure the fdatasync subprocess exits


On 2020/2/23 20:34, Eryu Guan wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 10:20:01AM +0800, zhangyi (F) wrote:
>> Now we just kill fdatasync_work process and wait nothing after the
>> test, so a busy unmount failure may appear if the fdatasync syscall
>> doesn't return in time.
>>   umount: /tmp/scratch: target is busy.
>>   mount: /tmp/scratch: /dev/sdb already mounted on /tmp/scratch.
>>   !!! failed to remount /dev/sdb on /tmp/scratch
>> This patch kill and wait the xfs_io fdatasync subprocess to make sure
>> _check_scratch_fs success.
> Yeah, that's a problem.
> I think you could add another "trap" in fdatasync_work, as what
> btrfs/036 does:
> 	trap "wait; exit" SIGTERM
> So xfs_io will be waited by fdatasync_work before exiting.

Thanks for your suggestion, I will do that.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists