On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 01:10:49PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 10:16:48AM -0500, Mitch Harder wrote: > > I've been playing around with resurrecting the basic sysfs > > capabilities that had been previously incorporated into btrfs. > > > > As it stands right now, it was relatively easy to re-implement sysfs > > as it was originally. However, that implementation of sysfs wasn't > > populated with much information (only total_blocks, blocks_used, and > > blocksize). > > Goffredo Baroncelli (CCed) posted a patch to enhance sysfs interface: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/308902/ > (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg06777.html) > > > I also had to reverse a small portion of code that was in the last > > clean-up. > > Restoring the code should not be a problem, the cleanup was too eager > and I think a sysfs inteface would be good, not only for debugging > purposes or tuning. > > > If a CONFIG_BTRFS_DEBUG type configuration flag is ever introduced, it > > would be interesting to resurrect btrfs' sysfs capabilities. > > Hearing about CONFIG_BTRFS_DEBUG again, seems worth to add it. For debugging stuff, please use debugfs instead of sysfs, as that is what it is there for. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
