Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs: save us an unnecessary ioctl call

2014-05-16 Thread David Sterba
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:58:46PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote: > Hi Anand, > > On 05/16/2014 12:32 PM, Anand Jain wrote: > > > >David, > > > > As mentioned, this patch will back-out the earlier patch > > > > 50275bacab0f62b91453fbfa29e75c2bb77bf9b6 > > > > I am confused on what I am missing ? Any c

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs: save us an unnecessary ioctl call

2014-05-15 Thread Wang Shilong
Hi Anand, On 05/16/2014 12:32 PM, Anand Jain wrote: David, As mentioned, this patch will back-out the earlier patch 50275bacab0f62b91453fbfa29e75c2bb77bf9b6 I am confused on what I am missing ? Any comment? You are right, i guess dave just missed your previous thread.:-) dave, please ign

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs: save us an unnecessary ioctl call

2014-05-15 Thread Anand Jain
David, As mentioned, this patch will back-out the earlier patch 50275bacab0f62b91453fbfa29e75c2bb77bf9b6 I am confused on what I am missing ? Any comment? Thanks, Anand On 16/05/14 01:06, David Sterba wrote: On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 05:05:05PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote: Btrfs device id

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs: save us an unnecessary ioctl call

2014-05-15 Thread David Sterba
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 05:05:05PM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote: > Btrfs device id start from 1, not 0. > --- a/utils.c > +++ b/utils.c > @@ -1765,7 +1765,7 @@ int get_fs_info(char *path, struct > btrfs_ioctl_fs_info_args *fi_args, > goto out; > } > > - for (; i <= fi_args-

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs: save us an unnecessary ioctl call

2014-05-13 Thread Anand Jain
> Btrfs device id start from 1, not 0. That was an intentional change. 50275ba btrfs-progs: there is devid 0 when replace is running Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong --- utils.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/utils.c b/utils.c index 560c557..d480353

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs: save us an unnecessary ioctl call

2014-05-13 Thread Wang Shilong
On 05/13/2014 06:48 PM, Stefan Behrens wrote: On Tue, 13 May 2014 17:05:05 +0800, Wang Shilong wrote: Btrfs device id start from 1, not 0. Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong --- utils.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/utils.c b/utils.c index 560c557..d480353 100

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs-progs: save us an unnecessary ioctl call

2014-05-13 Thread Stefan Behrens
On Tue, 13 May 2014 17:05:05 +0800, Wang Shilong wrote: > Btrfs device id start from 1, not 0. > > Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong > --- > utils.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/utils.c b/utils.c > index 560c557..d480353 100644 > --- a/utils.c > +++ b/utils

[PATCH] Btrfs-progs: save us an unnecessary ioctl call

2014-05-13 Thread Wang Shilong
Btrfs device id start from 1, not 0. Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong --- utils.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/utils.c b/utils.c index 560c557..d480353 100644 --- a/utils.c +++ b/utils.c @@ -1765,7 +1765,7 @@ int get_fs_info(char *path, struct btrfs_ioctl_fs_in