linux-kernel - Re: forced umount?

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1174245379.3538.252.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Date:	Sun, 18 Mar 2007 20:16:19 +0100
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: forced umount?

On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 23:06 -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> I'm interested in understanding the state of Linux with regard to
> _really_ forcing a filesystem to unmount.
> 
> There is a (stale) project at OSDL that has various implementations:
> http://developer.osdl.org/dev/fumount/

the problem with the people who say they want forced umount is.. that
most of the time they either want
1) get rid of the namespace entry
or
2) want to stop any and all IO to a certain device/partition 

1) is already supported with lazy umount (umount -l)
for 2), it's not forced umount that they want, it's really an IO
disconnect (which scsi supports btw in 2.6 kernels).

So.. depending on which of the 2 you are, it's there. Just it's not
called "forced umount".....

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/