[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEg-Je8UCV6kFdXJoyH3B78sraYCXscTmQQiPHjkPvzt5g1Wpw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 13:20:40 -0400
From: Neal Gompa <ngompa13@...il.com>
To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
Filipe Manana <fdmanana@...e.com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Btrfs BTRFS <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 0/2] vfs / btrfs: add support for ustat()
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 2:29 PM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 02:17:58PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > There's a lot of larger things that need to
> > be addressed in general to support the volume approach inside file systems
> > that is going to require a lot of work inside of VFS. If you feel like
> > tackling that work and then wiring up btrfs by all means have at it, but I'm
> > not seeing a urgent need to address this. Thanks,
>
> That's precisely what I what I want to hear me about. Things like this.
> Would btrfs be the ony user of volumes inside filesystem? Jeff had
> mentioned before this could also allow namespaces per volumes, and this
> might be a desirable feature.
>
> What else?
Wouldn't this be useful for union filesystems like OverlayFS? Or other
filesystems that support nested filesystems like bcachefs?
--
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists