From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: subvolumes missing from "btrfs subvolume list" output
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:47:38 +0800
Message-ID: <4E0BC7AA.7000709@cn.fujitsu.com>
References: <chaz20110629143747.GA28702@seebyte.com> <chaz20110629150041.GB28702@seebyte.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
To: Stephane Chazelas <stephane.chazelas@gmail.com>
Return-path: <linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <chaz20110629150041.GB28702@seebyte.com>
List-ID: <linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org>

Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> 2011-06-29 15:37:47 +0100, Stephane Chazelas:
> [...]
>> I found
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/8123/focus=8208
>>
>> which looks like the same issue, with Li Zefan saying he had a
>> fix, but I couldn't find any mention that it was actually fixed.
>>
>> Has anybody got any update on that?
> [...]
> 
> I've found
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/8232
> 

After that, I posted a patch to fix btrfs-progs, which Chris aggreed
on:

http://marc.info/?l=linux-btrfs&m=129238454714319&w=2

> but no corresponding fix or ioctl.c
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git;a=history;f=fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
> 
> I'm under the impression that the issue has been forgotten
> about.
> 
>>>From what I managed to gather though, it seems that what's on
> disk is correct, it's just the ioctl and/or "btrfs sub list"
> that's wrong. Am I right?
> 
> (btw, I forgot to mention the kernel version: 3.0rc4 amd64,
> btrfs tools from git)
>