On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 01:43:35PM -0500, Chris Mason wrote: > > I have the following reasons to support a mount.btrfs helper: > > 1) it is in a good point to check that everything is ok (see the > > thread > > related LVM snapshot, due to a dev.uuid conflicts), > > 2) it is in a good point to issue a good error explanation (missing > > device....) > > 3) it may handle case like "degraded" mode, where the filesystem is > > not > > fully functional but even as degraded have "some" functionals.. > > Ok, these three things are worth improving, but I'd like to take a > slightly different direction. Instead of recreating chunks of btrfs > dev scan, lets extend btrfs dev scan to at the very least understand #1 > and #2. As much as possible we want to be leveraging the data in udev > instead of recreating that functionality. Udev provides add/delete/change events, the mount helper would additionally provide the 'mount' event (although the action wont' be entirely user-defined). -- 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
