From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 1 17:27:24 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6578710656B3; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 17:27:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) Received: from esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca (esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca [131.104.91.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA9D88FC1B; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 17:27:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAAY5S0qDaFvG/2dsb2JhbADRF4QRBQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.42,326,1243828800"; d="scan'208";a="39941217" Received: from amazon.cs.uoguelph.ca ([131.104.91.198]) by esa-jnhn-pri.mail.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP; 01 Jul 2009 13:27:23 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by amazon.cs.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E772210159; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 13:27:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amazon.cs.uoguelph.ca Received: from amazon.cs.uoguelph.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (amazon.cs.uoguelph.ca [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7pNiV58pMoYq; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 13:27:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca (muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca [131.104.91.102]) by amazon.cs.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B1B42100E1; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 13:27:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (rmacklem@localhost) by muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca (8.11.7p3+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id n61HTiq18898; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 13:29:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca: rmacklem owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 13:29:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Rick Macklem X-X-Sender: rmacklem@muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca To: "Julian H. Stacey" In-Reply-To: <200907010048.n610mPem058027@fire.js.berklix.net> Message-ID: References: <200907010048.n610mPem058027@fire.js.berklix.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Kirk McKusick , Attilio Rao , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: umount -f implementation X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:27:25 -0000 On Wed, 1 Jul 2009, Julian H. Stacey wrote: > Kirk McKusick wrote: >> forced unmounts. The gentle force (-f) and the brute force (-F) >> unmount. > > -F Would also be nice for devd.conf detach, for when people > forget & pull a USB stick without unmounting first. > Better a corrupt stick than a crashed OS. > All I'll add is, for the experimental nfs client, if both semantics are desired (and, imho they are), there will need to be separate flags to indicate whether or not to terminate RPCs in progress. So, it seems that there is interest in a separate "umount -F" to handle the case of failed storage (disk subsystem, NAS server down,...). Is there anyone who is opposed to my pursuing this after FreeBSD-CURRENT branches from 8? (I can do the experimental nfs client + some testing. Hopefully others can help with the generic VFS issues and other file systems.) rick, who obviously doesn't have as good a memory as Kirk's:-) ps: Unfortunately Solaris uses "-F" for something entirely different, so feel free to suggest other flag values if you think that is a concern.