On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 09:41:16PM -0700, Allison Henderson wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Allison Henderson <allison.henderson@xxxxxxxxxx>
Needs commit message:
mkfs: enable formatting with parent pointers
Wire up parent pointer support in mkfs via the '-m parent' parameter.
Signed-off-by: <etc>
> ---
> mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c
> index 78d0ce5..554e1bf 100644
> --- a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c
> +++ b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c
> @@ -129,6 +129,7 @@ enum {
> M_UUID,
> M_RMAPBT,
> M_REFLINK,
> + M_PARENT,
Hmm, is this better off in the naming section?
e.g. "mkfs.xfs -n parent=1"
> M_MAX_OPTS,
> };
>
> @@ -663,6 +664,7 @@ struct opt_params mopts = {
> [M_UUID] = "uuid",
> [M_RMAPBT] = "rmapbt",
> [M_REFLINK] = "reflink",
> + [M_PARENT] = "parent",
> },
> .subopt_params = {
> { .index = M_CRC,
> @@ -693,6 +695,13 @@ struct opt_params mopts = {
> .maxval = 1,
> .defaultval = 1,
> },
> + { .index = M_PARENT,
> + .conflicts = { {NULL, LAST_CONFLICT } },
> + .minval = 0,
> + .maxval = 1,
> + .defaultval = 0,
This (misleadingly named) field is the default value if you pass the
argument without explicitly assigning a value, i.e.
# mkfs.xfs -m parent /dev/sda
sets parent to whatever defaultval is. In this case you'd get no parent
pointers, which is a little surprising.
And, uh, seeing as people keep getting this wrong maybe we should rename
it?
> + },
> +
> },
> };
>
> @@ -865,7 +874,7 @@ usage( void )
> {
> fprintf(stderr, _("Usage: %s\n\
> /* blocksize */ [-b size=num]\n\
> -/* metadata */ [-m crc=0|1,finobt=0|1,uuid=xxx,rmapbt=0|1,reflink=0|1]\n\
> +/* metadata */ [-m crc=0|1,finobt=0|1,uuid=xxx,rmapbt=0|1,reflink=0|1,parent=0|1]\n\
> /* data subvol */ [-d agcount=n,agsize=n,file,name=xxx,size=num,\n\
> (sunit=value,swidth=value|su=num,sw=num|noalign),\n\
> sectsize=num\n\
> @@ -1586,6 +1595,9 @@ meta_opts_parser(
> case M_REFLINK:
> cli->sb_feat.reflink = getnum(value, opts, subopt);
> break;
> + case M_PARENT:
> + cli->sb_feat.parent_pointers = getnum(value, &mopts, M_PARENT);
> + break;
> default:
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> @@ -2887,6 +2899,8 @@ sb_set_features(
> sbp->sb_features_ro_compat |= XFS_SB_FEAT_RO_COMPAT_RMAPBT;
> if (fp->reflink)
> sbp->sb_features_ro_compat |= XFS_SB_FEAT_RO_COMPAT_REFLINK;
> + if (fp->parent_pointers)
> + sbp->sb_features_ro_compat |= XFS_SB_FEAT_RO_COMPAT_PARENT;
Otherwise looks ok to me....
--D
>
> /*
> * Sparse inode chunk support has two main inode alignment requirements.
> --
> 2.7.4
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
