On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:33:21 +0200
Robert Nagy <rob...@openbsd.org> wrote:
> On (2011-07-28 10:30), Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> > Hi Antoine,
> >
> > Antoine Jacoutot wrote on Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:22:56AM +0200:
> > > On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, David Coppa wrote:
> > >> On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Robert Nagy wrote:
> >
> > >>> It seems that SIGTERM is not enough for mountd, according to
> > >>> the code SIGTERM only sends a RPCMNT_UMNTALL broadcast to the
> > >>> clients. So I think what we should do in this case is to first
> > >>> send a SIGTERM to mountd, and then SIGKILL it in rc_stop().
> >
> > >> Something like this? the sleep is just paranoia, don't know
> > >> if it's useful...
> >
> > > Why not use rc_post for SIGKILL?
> >
> > Because
> >
> > rc_do rc_wait stop || rc_exit failed
> >
> > is called before rc_post.
> >
> > When the daemon refuses to die, the post-mortem action will not
> > even be attempted.
> >
> > >> Index: mountd
> > >> ===================================================================
> > >> RCS file: /cvs/src/etc/rc.d/mountd,v
> > >> retrieving revision 1.1
> > >> diff -u -p -r1.1 mountd
> > >> --- mountd 8 Jul 2011 00:54:04 -0000 1.1
> > >> +++ mountd 28 Jul 2011 08:15:37 -0000
> > >> @@ -6,4 +6,10 @@ daemon="/sbin/mountd"
> > >>
> > >> . /etc/rc.d/rc.subr
> > >>
> > >> +rc_stop() {
> > >> + pkill -f "^${pexp}"
> > >> + sleep 1
> > >> + pkill -9 -f "^${pexp}"
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> rc_cmd $1
> >
> > I worry more that fixed-time sleeps often prove to short,
> > not so much that it might be useless, but i don't see a better
> > option right now. Sorry, I can't test or look in more detail
> > right now.
> >
> > Yours,
> > Ingo
> >
>
> I am not sure that we want to sleep or not. Theo what do you think?
>
I am not Theo, but I think we should better sleep in here, just as a
precaution to make sure all clients have unmounted.
