On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 06:31:06PM +0100, Alan Jenkins wrote:
> Hi
>
> I found this interesting, though I don't entirely follow the kernel
> mount/unmount code. I had one puzzle about the code, and two questions
> which I was largely able to answer.
>
> On 01/08/18 16:24, David Howells wrote:
> > +void dissolve_on_fput(struct vfsmount *mnt)
> > +{
> > + namespace_lock();
> > + lock_mount_hash();
> > + mntget(mnt);
> > + umount_tree(real_mount(mnt), UMOUNT_SYNC);
> > + unlock_mount_hash();
> > + namespace_unlock();
> > +}
>
> Can I ask why UMOUNT_SYNC is used here? I feel like I must have missed
> something, but doesn't it skip the IS_MNT_LOCKED() check in
> disconnect_mount() ?
>
> UMOUNT_SYNC seems used for non-lazy unmounts, and in internal cleanups where
> userspace wouldn't be able to see. But I think userspace can keep watching
> in this case, e.g. by `fd2 = openat(fd, ".", O_PATH)` (or `fd2 =
> open_tree(fd, ".", 0)` ?). I would think this function should avoid using
> UMOUNT_SYNC, like lazy unmount avoids it.
FWIW, I suspect that UMOUNT_CONNECTED might be the right thing here...
