Re: forced umount?

[Pekka Enberg]

On 3/17/07, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thanks for the heads up; its good to see that Pekka Enberg's work has
> continued.  I actually stumbled onto that line of work earlier while
> searching for more info on Tigran Aivazian's forced unmount (badfs)
> patches:
> http://lwn.net/Articles/192632/

FYI, the revoke implementation have since been changed to follow the
badfs-style approach of the forced unmount patches. However, there are
some problems with the forced unmount patches that are now fixed in
the revoke implementation:

 - You can't use munmap() to take down shared memory mappings because the
   application can accidentally remap something completely different
to that region.
 - The ->f_light bits slow down other fget_light() users and  there's
a race between
   fcheck_files() and set_f_light().
 - The operation can live-lock if a malicious process keeps forking. The revoke
   implementation solves this by revoking in two passes: (1) take
down the descriptors
   and (2) take down the actual inodes.

                          Pekka
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/