Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 17:55:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 17:55:30 -0500 Received: from leibniz.math.psu.edu ([146.186.130.2]:17559 "EHLO math.psu.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 17:55:20 -0500 Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 17:55:17 -0500 (EST) From: Alexander Viro To: Pavel Machek cc: Jakob ?stergaard , Ville Herva , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [STATUS 2.5] January 18, 2002 In-Reply-To: <20020123113122.GC965@elf.ucw.cz> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Pavel Machek wrote: > > It's not a forced umount - it detaches the subtree from mountpoint and > > filesystem(s) go away when they stop being busy. But for remote > > filesystems that's precisely what you want. > > Can I umount filesystems below them? Entire subtree gets umounted. Stuff that isn't busy gets shut down immediately, the rest - when it stops being busy. > Can I reboot with > busy-but-detached filesystems? You can, but if they are local you'll get dirty shutdown (if they are still busy at the time of reboot). > Can I kill the processes accessing busy > filesystems? [That was big point of force umount, I believe.] Huh? If process is killable - it's killable. What does it have to --force? - 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/