From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261713AbULaRy7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:54:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262136AbULaRyP (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:54:15 -0500 Received: from out014pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.46]:45965 "EHLO out014.verizon.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261713AbULaRvJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:51:09 -0500 From: Gene Heskett Reply-To: gene.heskett@verizon.net Organization: Organization: None, detectable by casual observers To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: the umount() saga for regular linux desktop users Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:51:04 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.7 Cc: William References: <200412311741.02864.wh@designed4u.net> In-Reply-To: <200412311741.02864.wh@designed4u.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200412311251.04187.gene.heskett@verizon.net> X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out014.verizon.net from [151.205.52.185] at Fri, 31 Dec 2004 11:51:05 -0600 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 31 December 2004 12:41, William wrote: >Hi > >I am a linux desktop user. I love linux and all the wonderfull >open-source/free software that comes with it... blah, blah, blah :). > The following comments and suggestions about umount() stem from > personal experience and are meant as friendly feedback for all you > clever people. (I wish I understook how the kernel works) > >Regularly, when attempting to umount() a filesystem I receive > 'device is busy' errors. The only way (that I have found) to solve > these problems is to go on a journey into processland and kill all > the guilty ones that have tied themselves to the filesystem > concerned. > If you are running kernel.org kernels, the fix is to update to at least 2.6.10-ac1, where much of this malarkey, particularly with regard to samba, has been attended to. >In order to help solve this problem is it possible to modify the > behaviour of the linux kernel. > >In my opinion, in order for linux to be trully user friendly, "a > umount() should NEVER fail" (even if the device containing the > filesystem is no longuer attached to the system). The kernel should > do it's best to satisfy the umount request and cleanup. Maybe the > kernel could try some of the following: > >1) if the device containing the filesystem (for local filesystems) > is no longer physicaly attached to the system: revoke all process > access to the filesystem and umount. Notify umount that the > filesystem was not cleanly umounted. > >2) notify all processes attached to the filesystem that they must > release control of it. > >3) the processes may respond to the notifications and request time > to clean up in order to read/write any remaining data. > >4) processes that do not respond within a given time-frame should > have their filesystem access revoked. > >5) once all the clean up has finnished... umount the > filesystem..... > >I am not subscribed to the list so please email me on > wh@designed4u.net > >Kind Regards > William Heyland > >the new "a umount() should NEVER fail" campaign launched by me on > december the 31 of 2004. Just in time for new year ;-) > >PS: I am currently teaching myself about kernels in general and am > hoping to start contributing to linux soon. But until then... if > the kernel can't handle a umount() then nothing in userspace can do > any better... rant, rant, rant, ... make umount() smarter.... > Please? >- >To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe > linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.31% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.