From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 11 12:28:11 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3325516A4A0 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2006 12:28:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.de [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6305C43D55 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2006 12:28:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 11 Sep 2006 12:28:08 -0000 Received: from p54A7FC43.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.0.12]) [84.167.252.67] by mail.gmx.net (mp040) with SMTP; 11 Sep 2006 14:28:08 +0200 X-Authenticated: #5465401 Message-ID: <45055654.7040808@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 14:28:04 +0200 From: "[LoN]Kamikaze" Organization: Lords of Nightmare User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060729) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Subject: non critical mounts X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 12:28:11 -0000 Failing NFS mounts with the -b option take a lot of time, because they fork AFTER an attempt has failed. And that normally takes a lot of time. So I have written that patch, which fixes the behaviour by forking even before the first attempt is made. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=103089 But now I wonder weather it wouldn't be better to introduce an option like nocrit for non critical mounts in sbin/mount that generally forks mounts with that option into the background. It would be useful for all kinds of replaceable drives and network shares. Especially in an ever changing environment such as a Laptop. Now why not amd you say, the answer being that it costs significant CPU time when using such a mount. That does not matter on an optical drive, but when you want to build the world on an external HD, it makes a difference.