在 2011-9-2,下午11:48, David Sterba 写道: > On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 09:13:34PM +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: >> --- a/ioctl.h >> +++ b/ioctl.h >> @@ -140,6 +140,8 @@ struct btrfs_ioctl_space_args { >> struct btrfs_ioctl_vol_args) >> #define BTRFS_IOC_SCAN_DEV _IOW(BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 4, \ >> struct btrfs_ioctl_vol_args) >> +#define BTRFS_IOC_FS_SETLABEL _IOW(BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 5, \ >> + struct btrfs_ioctl_fs_label_args) >> /* trans start and trans end are dangerous, and only for >> * use by applications that know how to avoid the >> * resulting deadlocks > > well, it is an unassigned number, but a newly added features should IMHO > allocate greater than current max value, ie over 31 in coordination with > > https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#Development_notes.2C_please_read > > table.
It sounds reasonable to allocate a greater value, could anyone please confirm it? Hi Zefan, What's your ioctl range for online fsck? Thanks, -Jeff > > > david > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html