[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140802131946.207c597c@notabene.brown>
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2014 13:19:46 +1000
From: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
To: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...il.com>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>,
Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Killing process in D state on mount to dead NFS server. (when
process is in fsync)
On Fri, 1 Aug 2014 22:55:42 -0400 Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...il.com> wrote:
> > That still leaves some open questions though...
> >
> > Is that enough to fix it? You'd still have the dirty pages lingering
> > around, right? Would a umount -f presumably work at that point?
>
> 'umount -f' will kill any outstanding RPC calls that are causing the
> mount to hang, but doesn't do anything to change page states or NFS
> file/lock states.
Should it though?
MNT_FORCE (since Linux 2.1.116)
Force unmount even if busy. This can cause data loss. (Only
for NFS mounts.)
Given that data loss is explicitly permitted, I suspect it should.
Can we make MNT_FORCE on NFS not only abort outstanding RPC calls, but
fail all subsequent RPC calls? That might make it really useful. You
wouldn't even need to "kill -9" then.
NeilBrown
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (829 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists