On July 12, 2016 8:55:50 PM GMT+02:00, "Todd C. Miller" <todd.mil...@courtesan.com> wrote: >On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 07:22:57 -1000, Tim Newsham wrote: > >> Here's another root-only (unless kern.usermount is set) panic issue. >We >> exercise it through tmpfs but it might be more general than that. >We're >> not sure what the proper remediation should be here. > >The only valid flag for umount(2) is MNT_FORCE.
Then wouldn't EINVAL be a reasonable response? Am I missing something? /Alexander > > - todd > >Index: vfs_syscalls.c >=================================================================== >RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/kern/vfs_syscalls.c,v >retrieving revision 1.261 >diff -u -p -u -r1.261 vfs_syscalls.c >--- vfs_syscalls.c 6 Jul 2016 19:26:35 -0000 1.261 >+++ vfs_syscalls.c 12 Jul 2016 18:55:09 -0000 >@@ -412,7 +412,7 @@ sys_unmount(struct proc *p, void *v, reg > if (vfs_busy(mp, VB_WRITE|VB_WAIT)) > return (EBUSY); > >- return (dounmount(mp, SCARG(uap, flags), p, vp)); >+ return (dounmount(mp, SCARG(uap, flags) & MNT_FORCE, p, vp)); > } > > /*
