On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 04:07:03PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
>
> ustat() does not work for btrfs, the reason is the VFS layer
> cannot get to the super block from the anonymous bdevs. The
> way these are used within btrfs though are to actually use a
> series of
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:29:19PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Isn't this the problem again the btrfs uses different assignments for
> st_dev than s_dev? I don't even want to think about a mess like this
> before that is fixed.
As much as I'd like to see that happen based on discussions so
Isn't this the problem again the btrfs uses different assignments for
st_dev than s_dev? I don't even want to think about a mess like this
before that is fixed.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More maj
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
ustat() does not work for btrfs, the reason is the VFS layer
cannot get to the super block from the anonymous bdevs. The
way these are used within btrfs though are to actually use a
series of them per superblock. This modifies the way the
VFS exposes these bdevs by peggi
