From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:43193 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751082AbaGJBWx (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jul 2014 21:22:53 -0400 Received: from kw-mxauth.gw.nic.fujitsu.com (unknown [10.0.237.134]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D5873EE0B6 for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:22:52 +0900 (JST) Received: from s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s3.gw.nic.fujitsu.com [10.0.50.93]) by kw-mxauth.gw.nic.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24EC5AC0226 for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:22:51 +0900 (JST) Received: from g01jpfmpwkw01.exch.g01.fujitsu.local (g01jpfmpwkw01.exch.g01.fujitsu.local [10.0.193.38]) by s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 379A81DB8043 for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:22:50 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <53BDEADD.6020707@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:22:37 +0900 From: Satoru Takeuchi MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Qu Wenruo , CC: Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: Add mount point output for 'btrfs fi df' command. References: <1404798203-17122-1-git-send-email-quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> <53BDE153.4060002@jp.fujitsu.com> <53BDE57F.60707@cn.fujitsu.com> <53BDE9D8.4070208@cn.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <53BDE9D8.4070208@cn.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: (2014/07/10 10:18), Qu Wenruo wrote: > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: Add mount point output for 'btrfs fi df' command. > From: Qu Wenruo > To: Satoru Takeuchi , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org > Date: 2014年07月10日 08:59 >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: Add mount point output for 'btrfs fi df' command. >> From: Satoru Takeuchi >> To: Qu Wenruo , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org >> Date: 2014年07月10日 08:41 >>> Hi Qu, >>> >>> (2014/07/08 14:43), Qu Wenruo wrote: >>>> Add mount point output for 'btrfs fi df'. >>>> Also since the patch uses find_mount_root() to find mount point, >>>> now 'btrfs fi df' can output more meaningful error message when given a >>>> non-btrfs path. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo >>>> --- >>>> This patch needs to be merged after the following path: >>>> btrfs-progs: Check fstype in find_mount_root() >>>> --- >>>> cmds-filesystem.c | 10 ++++++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/cmds-filesystem.c b/cmds-filesystem.c >>>> index 4b2d27e..d571765 100644 >>>> --- a/cmds-filesystem.c >>>> +++ b/cmds-filesystem.c >>>> @@ -187,12 +187,22 @@ static int cmd_filesystem_df(int argc, char **argv) >>>> int ret; >>>> int fd; >>>> char *path; >>>> + char *mount_point = NULL; >>>> DIR *dirstream = NULL; >>>> if (check_argc_exact(argc, 2)) >>>> usage(cmd_filesystem_df_usage); >>>> path = argv[1]; >>>> + ret = find_mount_root(path, &mount_point); >>>> + if (ret < 0) { >>>> + if (ret != -ENOENT) >>> Is "if (ret != -ENOENT)" to avoid the error message duplication >>> with the following code? >> Yes. >>> >>> utils.c: >>> =============================================================================== >>> ... >>> int find_mount_root(...) >>> { >>> ... >>> if (!longest_match) { >>> fprintf(stderr, >>> "ERROR: Failed to find mount root for path %s.\n", >>> path); >>> return -ENOENT; >>> } >>> ... >>> =============================================================================== >>> >>> I consider making the following two patches is the better way. >>> >>> - Patch 1. Removing this error message from find_mount_root(). >>> This cause no problem since all the current find_mount_root() >>> caller show their own error message. >>> - Patch 2. Your patch with removing that if sentence. >> Thanks for the suggestion, it really makes sense. >> I'll send the new version with other small modification like integrate realpath() into find_mount_root() >> since every caller of find_mount_root() does the realpath resolve. >> >> Thanks, >> Qu > P.S. I prefer to integrate all fprintf() into find_mount_root(), since that will make the error message more specific > and more easy to understandable. > So I'll remove the caller fprintf. > Would this be OK for you? It's OK for me. Satoru > > Thanks, > Qu >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Satoru >>> >>>> + fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: Failed to find mount root for path %s: %s\n", >>>> + path, strerror(-ret)); >>>> + return 1; >>>> + } >>>> + printf("Mounted on: %s\n", mount_point); >>>> + free(mount_point); >>>> fd = open_file_or_dir(path, &dirstream); >>>> if (fd < 0) { >>>> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html