From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp-36-i2.italiaonline.it ([212.48.25.210]:45296 "EHLO smtp-36.italiaonline.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751634AbaLESjT (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Dec 2014 13:39:19 -0500 Message-ID: <5481FBD5.9040004@inwind.it> Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 19:39:17 +0100 From: Goffredo Baroncelli Reply-To: kreijack@inwind.it MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V2][BTRFS-PROGS] Don't use LVM snapshot device References: <1417718382-6753-1-git-send-email-kreijack@inwind.it> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12/05/2014 08:26 AM, Duncan wrote: > Goffredo Baroncelli posted on Thu, 04 Dec 2014 19:39:37 +0100 as > excerpted: > >> To check if a device is a LVM snapshot, it is checked the 'udev' >> device property 'DM_UDEV_LOW_PRIORITY_FLAG' . If it is set to 1, >> the device has to be skipped. >> >> As consequence, btrfs now depends also by the libudev. > > Not being a coder I gotta ask... > > How does this patch deal with mdev (busybox) or static dev instead of > udev? Does it gracefully degrade to legacy LVM-agnostic behavior? My patch no; of course we can put some #ifdef to make it an option. [dropped the part related to systemd ....] -- gpg @keyserver.linux.it: Goffredo Baroncelli Key fingerprint BBF5 1610 0B64 DAC6 5F7D 17B2 0EDA 9B37 8B82 E0B5