On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 07:58:56PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > Christoph had noted that this seemed associated to the problem > that the btrfs uses different assignments for st_dev than s_dev, > but much as I'd like to see that changed based on discussions so > far its unclear if this is going to be possible unless strong > commitment is reached. Explain, please. Whose commitment and commitment to what, exactly? Having different ->st_dev values for different files on the same fs is a bloody bad idea; why does btrfs do that at all? If nothing else, it breaks the usual "are those two files on the same fs?" tests... -- 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
