On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 04:12:58PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> Userspace transactions were introduced in commit
> 6bf13c0cc833 ("Btrfs: transaction ioctls") to provide semantics that Ceph's
> object store required. However, things have changed significantly since then,
> to the point where btrfs is no longer suitable as a backend for ceph and in fact
> it's actively advised against such usages. Considering this, there doesn't
> seem to be a widespread, legit use case of userspace transaction. They also
> clutter the file->private pointer.
>
> So to end the agony let's nuke the userspace transaction ioctls. As a first
> step let's give time for people to voice their objection by just WARN()ining
> when the userspace transaction are used.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> index fa1b78cf25f6..5ddbacf67e95 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> @@ -4000,6 +4000,8 @@ static long btrfs_ioctl_trans_start(struct file *file)
> struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
> int ret;
>
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> +
> ret = -EPERM;
> if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> goto out;
> @@ -4280,6 +4282,8 @@ long btrfs_ioctl_trans_end(struct file *file)
> struct btrfs_root *root = BTRFS_I(inode)->root;
> struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans;
>
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
I don't think we need to warn twice, the ioctls must pair. Also, add
some printk about deprecation.
> +
> trans = file->private_data;
> if (!trans)
> return -EINVAL;
> --
> 2.7.4
>
--
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
