manu%netbsd.org@localhost (Emmanuel Dreyfus) writes: > The intent of hard mount is to make sure any I/O completes, at the > expense of waiting a long time if the server is down. But I think it is > wrong to extend that up to prevent root from forcibly unmounting a > filesystem. > > But thenthe problem is that when an I/O is already started on a hard > mount, we will not be able to abort it easily. How is this different from getting an IO error back from a disk? Once forcibly unmounted, the server is gone, and it seems appropriate to have all ops just return EIO locally.
Attachment:
pgp4D9_wtYR9w.pgp
Description: PGP signature