On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 02:32:34PM +1030, Qu Wenruo wrote: > For "btrfs subvolume snapshot -i <qgroupid>", we only expect the target > qgroup to be a higher level one. > > Assigning a 0 level qgroup to another 0 level qgroup is only going to > cause confusion, and I'm planning to do extra sanity checks both in > kernel and btrfs-progs to reject such behavior. I think this was never intended, the higher level were meant to group the leaf subvolumes. But it's possible that somebody is using it like is in the test. In that case we'd have to define the semantics or at least start warning about that and then remove it completely.
