[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090608162913.GL8633@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 17:29:13 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: ebiederm@...ssion.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, hugh@...itas.com, tj@...nel.org,
adobriyan@...il.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, gregkh@...e.de, npiggin@...e.de,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/23] File descriptor hot-unplug support v2
On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 11:41:19AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Jun 2009, Al Viro wrote:
> > Frankly, I very much suspect that force-umount is another case like that;
> > we'll need a *lot* of interesting cooperation from fs for that to work and
> > to be useful. I'd be delighted to be proven incorrect on that one, so
> > if you have anything serious in that direction, please share the details.
>
> Umm, not sure why we'd need cooperation from the fs. Simply wait for
> the operation to exit the filesystem or driver. If it's a blocking
> operation, send a signal to interrupt it.
And making sure that operations *are* interruptible (and that we can cope
with $BIGNUM new failure exits correctly) does not qualify as cooperation?
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists