From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Sep 8 10:50: 4 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from bingnet2.cc.binghamton.edu (bingnet2.cc.binghamton.edu [128.226.1.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04F3514D5B; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 10:49:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from zzhang@cs.binghamton.edu) Received: from sol.cs.binghamton.edu (cs1-gw.cs.binghamton.edu [128.226.171.72]) by bingnet2.cc.binghamton.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA09216; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 13:48:21 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 13:34:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Zhihui Zhang To: Luoqi Chen Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: The usage of MNT_RELOAD In-Reply-To: <199909081644.MAA10197@lor.watermarkgroup.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 8 Sep 1999, Luoqi Chen wrote: > > The flag MNT_RELOAD is not documented in mount manpages. From the source > > code, I find that it is always used along with MNT_UPDATE which can be > > speficied by user (-u option). Can anyone explain the usage of MNT_RELOAD > > for me? It seems not to be used normally. > > > It is created almost exclusively for fsck (and similar programs) to update > the in core image of the superblock (of / in single user mode) after the > on disk version has been modified. > Does fsck have to run on a MOUNTED filesystem? If so, your answer makes sense to me: if fsck modifies the on-disk copy of the superblock, it does not have to unmount and then remount the filesystem, it only need to reload the superlock for disk. -Zhihui To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message