lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Nov]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH/RFC] make btrfs subvol mounts appear in /proc/mounts
On Tue, Nov 03 2015, Chris Mason wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 03:50:12PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 07:25:10AM +0900, Neil Brown wrote:
>> >
>> > If you create a subvolume in btrfs and access it (by name) without
>> > mounting it, then the subvolume looks like a separate mount to some
>> > extent, returning a different st_dev to stat(), but it doesn't look like
>> > a separate mount in that it isn't listed in /proc/mounts. This
>> > inconsistency can confuse tools.
>> >
>> > This patch causes these subvolumes to become separate mounts by using
>> > the VFS' automount functionality, much like NFS uses automount when it
>> > discovered mountpoints on the server.
>> >
>> > The VFS currently makes it impossible to auto-mount a directory on to itself
>> > (i.e. a bind mount). For NFS this isn't a problem as a new superblock
>> > is created for the child filesystem so there are two separate dentries
>> > (and inodes) for the one directory: one in the parent filesystem, one in
>> > the child (note that the two superblocks share a common connection to
>> > the server so there is still a lot of commonality).
>> >
>> > BTRFS has chosen instead to use a single superblock for all subvolumes.
>>
>> Naive question: was there a reason for that choice?
>
> They are really all part of the same FS, the single super better fits.
> Or said another way, it felt like there would be dramatically more duct
> tape around supers-per-subvolume than there was abusing st_dev.
>
> Neil's patch came up after I told him a few of us had tried to do the
> same thing and failed to find clean vfs changes to make it possible...he
> took it as a challenge. Now I have to remember what it was about our
> past attempts that I didn't like.
>
> I'll test this and queue for 4.5 if it all works out, thanks Neil!

I'd rather resend with proper documentation updates and s-o-b before it
gets queued if that is OK. So once you are happy, please let me know
and I'll do it "properly".

Thanks,
NeilBrown
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-11-03 03:01    [W:0.074 / U:23.840 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site