在 2011-9-2，下午11:48， David Sterba 写道：
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 09:13:34PM +0800, Jeff Liu wrote:
>> --- a/ioctl.h
>> +++ b/ioctl.h
>> @@ -140,6 +140,8 @@ struct btrfs_ioctl_space_args {
>> struct btrfs_ioctl_vol_args)
>> #define BTRFS_IOC_SCAN_DEV _IOW(BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 4, \
>> struct btrfs_ioctl_vol_args)
>> +#define BTRFS_IOC_FS_SETLABEL _IOW(BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 5, \
>> + struct btrfs_ioctl_fs_label_args)
>> /* trans start and trans end are dangerous, and only for
>> * use by applications that know how to avoid the
>> * resulting deadlocks
>
> well, it is an unassigned number, but a newly added features should IMHO
> allocate greater than current max value, ie over 31 in coordination with
>
> https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#Development_notes.2C_please_read
>
> table.
It sounds reasonable to allocate a greater value, could anyone please confirm it?
Hi Zefan,
What's your ioctl range for online fsck?
Thanks,
-Jeff
>
>
> david
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
