On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 10:19:37PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> On 7/7/16 9:48 PM, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> > On 6/24/16 6:14 PM, je...@suse.com wrote:
> >> From: Jeff Mahoney
> >>
> >> One of the common complaints I've heard from new and experienced
> >> developers alike about the
On 7/7/16 9:48 PM, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> On 6/24/16 6:14 PM, je...@suse.com wrote:
>> From: Jeff Mahoney
>>
>> One of the common complaints I've heard from new and experienced
>> developers alike about the btrfs code is the ubiquity of
>> struct btrfs_root. There is one for every
On 6/24/16 6:14 PM, je...@suse.com wrote:
> From: Jeff Mahoney
>
> One of the common complaints I've heard from new and experienced
> developers alike about the btrfs code is the ubiquity of
> struct btrfs_root. There is one for every tree on disk and it's not
> always obvious
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 06:14:53PM -0400, je...@suse.com wrote:
> From: Jeff Mahoney
>
> One of the common complaints I've heard from new and experienced
> developers alike about the btrfs code is the ubiquity of
> struct btrfs_root. There is one for every tree on disk and it's
At 06/25/2016 06:14 AM, je...@suse.com wrote:
From: Jeff Mahoney
One of the common complaints I've heard from new and experienced
developers alike about the btrfs code is the ubiquity of
struct btrfs_root. There is one for every tree on disk and it's not
always obvious which
On 6/24/16 6:14 PM, je...@suse.com wrote:
> From: Jeff Mahoney
>
> One of the common complaints I've heard from new and experienced
> developers alike about the btrfs code is the ubiquity of
> struct btrfs_root. There is one for every tree on disk and it's not
> always obvious
From: Jeff Mahoney
One of the common complaints I've heard from new and experienced
developers alike about the btrfs code is the ubiquity of
struct btrfs_root. There is one for every tree on disk and it's not
always obvious which root is needed in a particular call path. It can