On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 10:27 AM Miklos Szeredi via Lsf-pc
<lsf-pc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 at 17:08, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > If we are going to start fixing userspace, then we better make sure to
> > > use the right interfaces, that won't have issues in the future.
> >
> > I agree we should give this a good thought which identification of a
> > filesystem is the best.
>
> To find mount boundaries statx.stx_mnt_id (especially with
> STATX_MNT_ID_UNIQUE) is perfect.
>
> By supplying stx_mnt_id to statmount(2) it's possible to get the
> device number associated with that filesystem (statmount.sb_dev_*). I
> think it's what Josef wants btrfs to return as st_dev.
>
> And statx could return that in stx_dev_*, with an interface feature
> flag, same as we've done with stx_mnt_id. I.e. STATX_DEV_NOHACK would
> force the vfs to replace anything the filesystem put in kstat.dev with
> sb->s_dev.
>
Miklos,
I would really like to have this discussion at LSFMM and it would be great
if you could join it remotely.
Care to fill out the form and ask for a virtual invite so that we have
you on our list?
https://forms.gle/TGCgBDH1x5pXiWFo7
Thanks,
Amir.
