Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 29 Aug 2001 08:49:59 -0500 (CDT) | From | Jesse Pollard <> | Subject | Re: Re[2]: Shutting down NFS |
| |
--------- Received message begins Here ---------
> > Hello Jesse, > > Wednesday, August 29, 2001, 3:58:07 PM, you wrote: > >> killall5 -15; sleep 5; killall5 -9; sleep 5 > >> killall5 -15; sleep 5; killall5 -9; sleep 5 > >> killall5 -15; sleep 5; killall5 -9 ? > >> > >> This looks ugly and total sleep time is 25 sec. > >> A better way is to make NFS daemons understand what user wants after > >> first call, not a third. > > JP> This already looks like overkill :-) Only the first one should be > JP> needed. I can understand that NFSD could disable signal 15, but not > JP> how it can disable 9... The only way I know for that to happen is > JP> if the process is in an uninterruptable sleep for some reason (and > JP> that should only delay signal delivery, not eliminate it). > > It looks like killall5 bug - "killall -9 nfsd" kills nfsd at once. > Do you know where killall5 source is? There's no killall5 in > util-linux...
Glad you found it... The killall5 source is part of the sysvinit. I found it on the Slackware 8 source disk. (I wonder about the "will not kill processes in current session" thing... does nfsd appear to be in the same session???? I wouldn't think so, but that would explain why some of terminations takes so long, and why some signals appear to be disabled)
------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jesse I Pollard, II Email: pollard@navo.hpc.mil
Any opinions expressed are solely my own. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |