On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 06:57:17PM +0100, Filipe David Manana wrote: > >> > Are these changes compatible with software using the old stream version? We > >> > have snapshotting tools that are using send/recieve and it would be bad to > >> > change the ABI in incompatible ways underneath them. > >> > --Mark > >> > >> New versions of btrfs-progs (send stream v2 support) will still be > >> able to read and process v1 streams. Older btrfs-progs (v1 only) won't > >> be able to process the new commands. > >> Does this answers your question Mark? > > > > Yes it does thanks. Unfortunately though this is unacceptable behavior - > > kernel upgrades are not supposed to break existing userspace interfaces. > > > > In particular what will happen here is that the user will grab a new kernel > > and then find out that their fancy snapshotting software won't work any > > more. > > Good point. I followed this approach based on Josef's comments on a > previous rfc at http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg32999.html Apparently Josef doesn't get those sorts of bugs in his queue ;) > The only alternative I can think of right now is to use new send ioctl > flags instead, so that new clients able to process the new commands > will pass these flags explicitly, while old clients would continue to > work without changes (and not bumping the stream version, as > btrfs-receive refuses versions higher than 1 currently). This seems to > be similar to what was done here: > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=cb95e7bf7ba481c3d35b238b1cd671b63f54238a Yeah that works for me - any client that understand the new features just sends some flag that indicates it can process them. Then we know that old clients will continue to work unaffected. Thanks Filipe, --Mark -- Mark Fasheh -- 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
