From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Mike Snitzer" Subject: Re: forced umount? Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 00:37:26 -0500 Message-ID: <170fa0d20703162237m1023cbd2o8ccf9e464c53f4a0@mail.gmail.com> References: <170fa0d20703162106v47dc13e1u1ae5381576f372ed@mail.gmail.com> <45FB6E32.3050009@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" Return-path: Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.235]:38527 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933535AbXCQFh1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Mar 2007 01:37:27 -0400 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 41so772514wry for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:37:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <45FB6E32.3050009@goop.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On 3/16/07, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Mike Snitzer wrote: > > Is this forced umount work even considered worthwhile by the greater > > Linux community? Is anyone actively working on this? > > Have a look at all the discussion about revoke/frevoke on lkml over the > last week or two. Thanks for the heads up; its good to see that Pekka Enberg's work has continued. I actually stumbled onto that line of work earlier while searching for more info on Tigran Aivazian's forced unmount (badfs) patches: http://lwn.net/Articles/192632/ Mike