Re: Is "unmount -f" worked as expected?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




>On 5/31/18, 8:18 AM, "bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 >  On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 03:14:44PM +0000, Shawn Lu (shawlu) wrote:
 >   >  Thanks Joshua for great help.   From context provided by joshua, I am
 >   >  believe that the community is full aware of the “-f “ issue, but
 >   >  still pending on solution. 
 >   > 
 >   >  Wondering whether community have consensus yet on what should be the
 >   >  correct behavior for “ force unmount”?  I hope maintainer of NFS can
 >   >  give some guardian for direction.
 >   > 
 >   > My use case is also on embedded system where NFS server can go offline
 >   > unexpected. What I looks for is something that can aggressive umount
 >   > NFS in timely manner.  Data loss is secondly in my situation.
    
 >   Dumb question: in that case, why not just cut power?

☺ this is best effort.  we still care about data loss at local mount. In some cases, data loss can’t be avoided if NFS client doesn’t want to hang in there until server recovery. 
    
 >  > One case is involved with  cross mounted nfs from different host.
    
 >  Note: in theory I think there are some deadlocks possible if client and
 >   server mount each other.  (Each host could be waiting on the other one
 >   to process writes before it can free memory that it needs to make
 >   progress.)

Yes.  I hope aggressive umount  will  help by setting a very short grace period and timeout before umount.

    
 >   --b.
    
 >   > Here,
 >   > both server and client will be  shutdown at same time on reboot.  NFS
 >   > client side will stuck on shutdown for long time if “umount –l”  is
 >   > used to umount NFS.
 >   > 
 >   > The previous work done by Joshua and  Neil Brown will definitely help
 >   > to resolve my use case if patch can be up streamed.  Hope magic will
 >   > happen soon . 
 >   > 
    > Just wondering whether a kernel configure (eg.
    > CONFIG_NFS_AGRRESSIVE_SHUTDOWN)  can be added to enhance “force
    > umount “ to act more aggressive.  This feature will be off by default
    > so the admin use to the “soft “ force mount will get the same behavior
    > as before.  When the feature is turn on,  “umount –f”  is Guarantee to
    > succeed.  
    

��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��w���jg��������ݢj����G�������j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Linux Media Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Info]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux