Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-xfs); Fri, 20 Feb 2004 05:48:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay03.roc.ny.frontiernet.net (relay03.roc.ny.frontiernet.net [66.133.131.36]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with SMTP id i1KDm7KO006660 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 05:48:07 -0800 Received: (qmail 32230 invoked from network); 20 Feb 2004 13:48:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO xfs.org) ([208.186.10.249]) (envelope-sender ) by relay03.roc.ny.frontiernet.net (FrontierMTA 2.3.6) with SMTP for ; 20 Feb 2004 13:48:06 -0000 Message-ID: <40360FC8.4060405@xfs.org> Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:46:48 -0600 From: Steve Lord User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040208) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ram Pai CC: Dean Roehrich , linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: DMAPI test suite. References: <200402181519.i1IFJS9i11055016@clink.americas.sgi.com> <1077265286.7503.37.camel@dyn319009bld.beaverton.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <1077265286.7503.37.camel@dyn319009bld.beaverton.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-archive-position: 2171 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: linux-xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: lord@xfs.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-xfs Ram Pai wrote: > On Wed, 2004-02-18 at 07:19, Dean Roehrich wrote: > >>It probably needs to be upgraded to the latest autotools. It's a bit old. >> >>I don't have an rpm for the binaries. > > > Ok. I am not able to run this test suite. In any case, I want to > validate the behavior of XFS for pre-unmount event. > > As per the spec the pre-unmount event should be generated before the > operation is about to check for open files. However given the current > VFS code I am not sure, how could ever any filesystem support this > feature correctly. You are probably correct here, the vfs keeps track of the busy count and apart from the unmount_begin operation which is called in the MNT_FORCE case, there is not a lot of opportunity to insert this call. If the pre-unmount event is allowed to fail the unmount then this will not work either since it does not stop the unmount. > > The VFS code may not even inform the filesystem specific unmount handler > in some cases. As a result no filesystem can ever support this feature > correctly. Is my understanding correct? Does XFS provide the > pre-unmount event correctly? > There is a pre_unmount event in xfs, it is after the vfs has cleaned up all the inodes (in the put_super code), if it returns an error then the vfs will still finish the unmount, and you may well get one of those self destruct in 5 seconds messages. > Any ideas? > RP Al Viro is distinctly anti dmapi, so chances are slim to none I would say. Steve