I am posting with hope to improve the reliability and usability of
unmounting 'busy' filesystems (for which umount -f doesn't work and no
remedy is known).
There are no apparent resource holders but the device is still 'busy'. (
I am posting with hope to improve the reliability and usability of
unmounting 'busy' filesystems (for which umount -f doesn't work and no
remedy is known).
There are no apparent resource holders but the device is still 'busy'. (
On 8/28/07, Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Evans wrote:
> > On 8/28/07, Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Michael Evans wrote:
> >>> On 8/28/07, Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>> Michael
On 8/28/07, Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Evans wrote:
> > On 8/28/07, Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Michael Evans wrote:
> >>> Oh, I see. I forgot about the changelogs. I'd send out version 5
> >>> now,
On 8/28/07, Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Evans wrote:
> > Oh, I see. I forgot about the changelogs. I'd send out version 5
> > now, but I'm not sure what kernel version to make the patch against.
> > 2.6.23-rc4 is on kernel.org and I
On 8/27/07, Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael J. Evans wrote:
> > On Monday 27 August 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> >> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 15:16:21 -0700 Michael J. Evans wrote:
> >>
> >>> =
> >>> ---
On 8/27/07, Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael J. Evans wrote:
On Monday 27 August 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 15:16:21 -0700 Michael J. Evans wrote:
=
--- linux/drivers/md/md.c.orig 2007-08-21
On 8/28/07, Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Evans wrote:
Oh, I see. I forgot about the changelogs. I'd send out version 5
now, but I'm not sure what kernel version to make the patch against.
2.6.23-rc4 is on kernel.org and I don't see any git snapshots.
Additionally I
On 8/28/07, Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Evans wrote:
On 8/28/07, Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Evans wrote:
Oh, I see. I forgot about the changelogs. I'd send out version 5
now, but I'm not sure what kernel version to make the patch against.
2.6.23
On 8/28/07, Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Evans wrote:
On 8/28/07, Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Evans wrote:
On 8/28/07, Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Evans wrote:
Oh, I see. I forgot about the changelogs. I'd send out version 5
now
On 8/26/07, Kyle Moffett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 26, 2007, at 08:20:45, Michael Evans wrote:
> > Also, I forgot to mention, the reason I added the counters was
> > mostly for debugging. However they're also as useful in the same
> > way that listing the
On 8/26/07, Kyle Moffett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 26, 2007, at 08:20:45, Michael Evans wrote:
Also, I forgot to mention, the reason I added the counters was
mostly for debugging. However they're also as useful in the same
way that listing the partitions when a new disk is added can
On 8/26/07, Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 04:51:24 -0700 Michael J. Evans wrote:
>
> > From: Michael J. Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
>
> Is there any way to tell the user what device (or partition?) is
> bein skipped? This printk should just print (confirm) that
On 8/26/07, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 26 2007 04:51, Michael J. Evans wrote:
> > {
> >- if (dev_cnt >= 0 && dev_cnt < 127)
> >- detected_devices[dev_cnt++] = dev;
> >+ struct detected_devices_node *node_detected_dev;
> >+ node_detected_dev =
Also, I forgot to mention, the reason I added the counters was mostly
for debugging. However they're also as useful in the same way that
listing the partitions when a new disk is added can be (in fact this
augments that and the existing messages the autodetect routines
provide).
As for using
Also, I forgot to mention, the reason I added the counters was mostly
for debugging. However they're also as useful in the same way that
listing the partitions when a new disk is added can be (in fact this
augments that and the existing messages the autodetect routines
provide).
As for using
On 8/26/07, Jan Engelhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 26 2007 04:51, Michael J. Evans wrote:
{
- if (dev_cnt = 0 dev_cnt 127)
- detected_devices[dev_cnt++] = dev;
+ struct detected_devices_node *node_detected_dev;
+ node_detected_dev =
On 8/26/07, Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 04:51:24 -0700 Michael J. Evans wrote:
From: Michael J. Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there any way to tell the user what device (or partition?) is
bein skipped? This printk should just print (confirm) that
I'll look at this again on my next weekend and make the changes.
If it exists I'd rather it functioned without issues. My initrds are
created by gentoo's genkernel script, which places dmraid on them.
I'm not sure if it supports autodetect or not.
On 8/24/07, Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'll look at this again on my next weekend and make the changes.
If it exists I'd rather it functioned without issues. My initrds are
created by gentoo's genkernel script, which places dmraid on them.
I'm not sure if it supports autodetect or not.
On 8/24/07, Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
20 matches
Mail list logo
