Re: [PATCH 06/12] man: document the new allocation group geometry ioctl

Darrick J. Wong
2019-09-03T03:22:19Z

On Tue, Sep 04, 2019 at 08:36:57AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 01:48:49PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 03:53:47PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 01:31:48PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > > + uint64_t ag_reserved[12];
> > >
> > > Where's the flags field for feature versioning? Please don't tell me
> > > we merged an ioctl structure without a flags or version field in
> > > it...
> >
> > Yes, we did, though the "reserved fields are always zeroed" enables us
> > to retroactively define this to v0 of the structure.
>
> OK, but this is an input/output structure, not an output-only
> structure, so the flags field needs to cover what features the
> caller might be expecting the kernel to return, too.,,

What do you think of the v2 "xfs: define a flags field for the AG
geometry ioctl structure" patch, then?

--D

> > > > +};
> > > > +.fi
> > > > +.in
> > > > +.TP
> > > > +.I ag_number
> > > > +The number of allocation group that the caller wishes to learn about.
> > >
> > > "the index of"....
> > >
> > > "The number of" is easily confused with a quantity....
> > >
> > > Is this an input or an output?
> >
> > Purely an input.
> >
> > "The caller must set this field to the index of the allocation group
> > that the caller wishes to learn about." ?
>
> *nod*.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com