On Fri, 06 Nov 2009, ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Hello, > > > > Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> It isn't what I want but it is what the VFS requires. If let the vfs > >> continue on it's delusional state we will leak the vfs mount and > >> everything mounted on top of it, with no way to remove the mounts. "umount -l" on the whole thing will clear any submounts up too. > > > > This is caused by not having any way to prevent deletion on > > directories with submounts, right? How does other distributed > > filesystems deal with directories with submounts going away underneath > > it? > > NFS does exactly the same thing I am doing. Yes, this is a problem for NFS too. You cannot tell the NFS server "this directory is mounted on some client, don't let anything happen to it!". Basically the remaining choices are: a) let the old path leading up to the mount still be accessible, even though it doesn't exist anymore on the server (or has been replaced with something different) b) automatically dissolve any submounts if the path disappeard on the server I think Al was arguing in favor of b), while Linus said that mounts must never just disappear, so a) is better. I don't think an agreement was reached. Thanks, Miklos -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
