On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 23:41:08 -0500, Bruno Wolff III bruno@wolff.to wrote:
Do you know if the issue is umounting in the wrong order or missing umounts? I would expect this patch to fix umounting stuff in the wrong order, but if a umount is missed, then I wouldn't expect the umount to succeed without manual intervention. That would be no worse than today, but wouldn't be a big help either.
I see this is just the general bind umount. So probably the problem is something pinning one of the bind mounts. That should go away on exit and then the deferred umounts should all get processed. I need to review the original bug to check that, but I think that is what I remember now.
I'll look at getting this committed tomorrow after I have had some sleep. I suspect we probably want to keep the bug open as this isn't a fix of the root cause and as long as we think that is possible / practical we should keep it open.