From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-we0-f173.google.com (mail-we0-f173.google.com [74.125.82.173]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 843456B0083 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 23:20:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-we0-f173.google.com with SMTP id q58so5096878wes.32 for ; Fri, 01 Aug 2014 20:20:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.suse.de (cantor2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id bw8si22843986wjb.69.2014.08.01.20.20.05 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 01 Aug 2014 20:20:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2014 13:19:46 +1000 From: NeilBrown Subject: Re: Killing process in D state on mount to dead NFS server. (when process is in fsync) Message-ID: <20140802131946.207c597c@notabene.brown> In-Reply-To: References: <53DA8443.407@candelatech.com> <20140801064217.01852788@notabene.brown> <53DAB307.2000206@candelatech.com> <20140801075053.2120cb33@notabene.brown> <20140801212120.1ae0eb02@tlielax.poochiereds.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_/EEnww1=jFLDDwB=.9eVfr5p"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Trond Myklebust Cc: Jeff Layton , Ben Greear , Andrew Morton , "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org --Sig_/EEnww1=jFLDDwB=.9eVfr5p Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 1 Aug 2014 22:55:42 -0400 Trond Myklebust wrote: > > That still leaves some open questions though... > > > > Is that enough to fix it? You'd still have the dirty pages lingering > > around, right? Would a umount -f presumably work at that point? >=20 > 'umount -f' will kill any outstanding RPC calls that are causing the > mount to hang, but doesn't do anything to change page states or NFS > file/lock states. Should it though? MNT_FORCE (since Linux 2.1.116) Force unmount even if busy. This can cause data loss. (O= nly for NFS mounts.) Given that data loss is explicitly permitted, I suspect it should. Can we make MNT_FORCE on NFS not only abort outstanding RPC calls, but fail all subsequent RPC calls? That might make it really useful. You wouldn't even need to "kill -9" then. NeilBrown --Sig_/EEnww1=jFLDDwB=.9eVfr5p Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUBU9xY2Tnsnt1WYoG5AQJ1XA/7B4djzTDFNSOEbZB1eY4ZHSD2yCrOGpwG 0FBUJYDvy4bMpnDahcgVSabI6ov3hFPqHxWWF9oO4fNIZVXgWdHp2MqA3I0zaoWm 2BDVl8CJE1DMfQ4sMasx5W+HroB+g7UIfCg6KtaqdxfsxYIMXmcecKNJTwS9YUiq jIQdXIk9PJFm5xzv9K4pk5If5m6VMfSzfg3xD0CAD3CpnvjZ45NVux6QQQ5EZTsd eSEv0wVNKEBLPeVoYVfJ3YtIbP9E+sC/boOFAzJtoU9Ftj8odz19qlPa27JrMHMd w4+Ttc2fWGkrDJ/IuI1MP3vYggiwN7OBDp8KJecQtSyWFolWjv59ZU1t2Vj57uhk wLAUV80FOH0EdVqNlYj/XXMtaJVSFdatTP3tBZnSvK/MIKYHP1NPOjBR4Cwreeg7 PPjP5QzrXXi4bPQPh2RIlybKzlvh2dFnQrFu75w9LuuyKFtIa6nxqqJueIa8bHSg HXWOA96nSgsyJpaUDAcmmrH1p2fDOi6Z+wAU9rbOVzv52XITDg6gyqDtrZoTyELs OcS1SoNB6RQams3z3+cl4otK1jHTY7W04Eow2N2gnsuPBFOfiOOk/7B5qm9sl0Bg eyO1TaRDP1J5mES71+v/Oh5Q+oQmvGyzq8CyAr4FhzEdrfVhDCMMiqhv5RLWLvWy EmjIfQIXUhE= =NAMK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/EEnww1=jFLDDwB=.9eVfr5p-- -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org