xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Two XFS involving stack traces from Debian's 2.6.26-2-amd64

To: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Two XFS involving stack traces from Debian's 2.6.26-2-amd64
From: Stuart Rowan <strr-debian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:14:44 +0100
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200910011244.37489@xxxxxx>
References: <4AC45B72.9060500@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200910011244.37489@xxxxxx>
Reply-to: strr-debian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20090915 Thunderbird/3.0b4
Michael Monnerie wrote, on 01/10/09 11:44:
On Donnerstag 01 Oktober 2009 Stuart Rowan wrote:
umount /tmp/$from ; /sbin/lvremove -f /dev/$vgroup/snap-shot ; rmdir
/tmp/$from

Why don't you
umount /tmp/$from&&  /sbin/lvremove -f /dev/$vgroup/snap-shot&&  rmdir
/tmp/$from
from your script so this won't happen again?
Or make a loop around umount?

mfg zmi

Thanks, I've changed it as you suggested. It's true a second call to umount does unmount it (well it disappears from /proc/mounts anyway).

However lvremove still does not succeed because it still believes the volume to be open.

Cheers,
Stu.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>