On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Ken Sumrall <ksumrall@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Writing a single byte to /proc/sysrq-trigger is an asynchronous
> operation, with no obvious way to be informed that it has completed
> the remount.
Right you are. That's something of a misfeature, but it comes from the
way sysrq works: obviously the "real" sysrq thing is about keyboard
input, so all the sysrq stuff has to be async.
The fact that that async nature then ends up also affecting the
/proc/sysrq-trigger case (which _could_ be synchronous) is a bit sad
in this case.
That said, I obviously think that just doing the read-only mount
yourself is the right thing to do regardless, and the sysrq thing
would have been just a cute/ugly hack if it had worked.
> I'm heading down the path of reading /proc/mounts and remounting all
> read-wirte filesystems backed by a block device as read-only.
So just as a practical matter: while it's quite possible that the nice
seq_printf() model of /proc/mounts means that it should work correctly
even if you read each line individually and then re-mount while
holding the file open, I would suggest that you read the whole file
into a buffer before you then start changing the mounts.
Otherwise, _if_ we ever were to actually move the filesystem on our
internal list of mounts when we re-mount it, you might otherwise end
up seeign the same filesystem multiple times (or the reverse - missing
some filesystem).
Basically, I'm saying that you should try to avoid changing mount
information in between read() calls to /proc/mounts. It might cause
confusion.
Linus
--
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
