Re: [PATCH 4/4] btrfs-progs: correct manpage option description for scrub

[Gui Hecheng <guihc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>]

On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 14:20 +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
> Hi Gui,
> 
> (2014/07/17 11:40), Gui Hecheng wrote:
> > The -f option of scrub means to skip checking running scrub,
> > not to force checking.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Gui Hecheng <guihc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> > ---
> >   Documentation/btrfs-scrub.txt | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/btrfs-scrub.txt b/Documentation/btrfs-scrub.txt
> > index 7b27d63..1af9b9f 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/btrfs-scrub.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/btrfs-scrub.txt
> > @@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ manpage).
> >   -n <ioprio_classdata>::::
> >   Set IO priority classdata (see `ionice`(1) manpage).
> >   -f::::
> > -force to check whether scrub has started or resumed in userspace.
> > +force to skip checking whether scrub has started or resumed in userspace.

Hi Satoru,
Thanks for your comments first. My opinions are as follows:

> I consider "scrub has started and resumed" is not user-friendly
> expression. First, it can be replaced with more easy one,
> "scrub is running". Second, there in no explanation about
> this checking behavior before "-f" option's description.

Yes, "Scrub is running" is more precise.

> So, how about the following idea?
> 
>  Fix 1. Add "If scrub is already running running, it fails."
>         to the description before `Options` section
  This is really a valuable idea. 

>  Fix 2. Replace "force to check ..." with
>         "force starting new scrub even if scrub is already running."
  This is more precise.

>  Fix 3. Fix cmd_scrub_start_usage too.
  Of course, thanks for reminding me.

So please let me rework this patch, could I add your sign-off-by then?

Thanks,
Gui
> 
> Thanks,
> Satoru
> 
> >   this is useful when scrub stat record file is damaged.
> >   
> >   *cancel* <path>|<device>::
> > 
>