On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 08:32:36AM -0400, jlnance@intrex.net wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 03:01:26PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> > convenient when you are doing fs hacking ;-) Actually I've got into
> > a habit of using that instead of normal umount in all cases except
> > the shutdown scripts - works just fine (for obvious reasons in case
> > of shutdown non-lazy behaviour is precisely what we want).
>
> Why not shutdown? This is the place I think it would help me the most.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim
If you have a FS with a process stuck in D state, and you shutdown with an
umount that *always* does lazy unmounting you get the same affect, because
you'd want the kernel to pause the shutdown until the FS was properly
unmounted.
Either way, you'd have a system you can't reboot without hardware reset if
you have a process stuck in D state on a rw FS.
I have a system with badblocks and shutdown stuck in D state. Kernel is
2.2.19 on PPC with the freeswan1.9 patch.
It has been stuck for about two weeks, but operating normally otherwise.
I'm going to have to sync; sync; and power off, as I need to update the
kernel anyway.
I too would like to see a way to force umount, but I don't see a safe way.
OTOH, I'm also not a kernel hacker. Does anyone see a solution?
Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 15 2001 - 21:00:54 EST