On 07/17/2012 01:53 PM, David Sterba wrote: > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 08:12:52PM +0200, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: >> On 06/21/2012 10:10 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: >>> This will be used in conjunction with btrfs device ready <dev>. This is [....] > >> Finally I am starting to think that we should definitely switch to a >> /sys/btrfs style of interface > > I'm all for a sysfs interface, having an ioctl way of retrieving > information is good, but not practical for use from scripting languages, > namely for writing tests. Moreover a sysfs interface is more extensible for further enanchement > > There are some guys working on the sysfs patches, I did preliminary > reviews. The first step is to bring back the core sysfs support (mostly > done iirc) and then exporting various information. > I'll check what's the status. Great, are there public patches, I am interested in contributing > >> think something like: >> >> /sys/btrfs/<fs-uuid>/<dev-uuid>/present >> size >> space-occuped >> number-of-error >> [...] >> >> /sys/btrfs/<fs-uuid>/<subvolume-id>/read-only >> compressed >> raid-mode >> path >> [...] >> >> /sys/btrfs/<fs-uuid>/label >> mounted >> read-only >> compressed >> raid-mode >> [...] > > That's a good start for a discussion. > > > 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
