On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 19:47 +0000, Mike Fleetwood wrote: > On 7 November 2014 18:16, David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 10:07:43AM +0800, Gui Hecheng wrote: > >> The @fi_args->num_devices in @get_fs_info() does not include seed devices. > >> We could just correct it by searching the chunk tree and count how > >> many dev_items there are in total which includes seed devices. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Gui Hecheng <guihc.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> *Note* > >> This is just a temporary workaround to fix this problem in order to > >> make users happy, because a new ioctl or sysfs interface to handle this > >> problem needs more discussions and efforts. After the work implemented > >> and accepted, we could drop this. > > > > Nice, thanks. I agree that this kind of workaround is best possible for > > the moment, and I'm glad to see that it's not that much code to get the > > seeding devices right. This would also work with older kernels without > > the updated sysfs/ioctl interfaces, so this is likely to stay for a long > > time. > > > >> +u64 find_max_id(struct btrfs_ioctl_search_args *search_args, int nr_items) > > > > That's a very generic name for a function that does a very specialized > > thing, but I don't have a suggestion right now. > > Is find_max_device_id a suitable name? I think this one is really more clear. > >> +int correct_fs_info(int fd, struct btrfs_ioctl_fs_info_args *fi_args) > > > > Same here, make fs_info correct but in what way? A comment would be good > > as well. > > Sorry, no suggestion for this function name. may be @search_chunk_tree_for_fs_info? Thanks for the suggestions. -Gui > Thanks, > Mike -- 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
