Following this patch the idea is to use lblkid to scan
for the btrfs disks by default which means we don't
use BTRFS_SCAN_PROC any more.
Firstly, i would like to know if we will get any different results between
scanning
/proc/partions and using lbkid.
I take blkid as a more authoritative
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 12:21:51AM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote:
> > Following this patch the idea is to use lblkid to scan
> > for the btrfs disks by default which means we don't
> > use BTRFS_SCAN_PROC any more.
>
> Firstly, i would like to know if we will get any different results between
> scann
Helo Anand,
>
>
> Following this patch the idea is to use lblkid to scan
> for the btrfs disks by default which means we don't
> use BTRFS_SCAN_PROC any more.
Firstly, i would like to know if we will get any different results between
scanning
/proc/partions and using lbkid.
If not, why we can
Following this patch the idea is to use lblkid to scan
for the btrfs disks by default which means we don't
use BTRFS_SCAN_PROC any more.
which implies commands btrfs filesystem show and btrfs device scan will
use lblkid to scan disks instead of current /proc/partitions
by default.
So now
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain
---
utils.c | 54 ++
utils.h | 2 ++
2 files changed, 56 insertions(+)
diff --git a/utils.c b/utils.c
index c6022fc..ccb5199 100644
--- a/utils.c
+++ b/utils.c
@@ -1914,6 +1914,57 @@ int test_dev_for_mkfs(char *file,
