From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:57609 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753019AbeEKOM5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 May 2018 10:12:57 -0400 Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 16:10:17 +0200 From: David Sterba To: Al Viro Cc: Eric Sandeen , Eric Sandeen , fsdevel , "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" , Linux API Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 V2] fs: hoist BTRFS_IOC_[SG]ET_FSLABEL to vfs Message-ID: <20180511141017.GZ6649@twin.jikos.cz> Reply-To: dsterba@suse.cz References: <4a4f33c3-2173-9795-f4e4-1e9d338fd9a7@sandeen.net> <20180510191608.GR30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180510191608.GR30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 08:16:09PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 01:13:57PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > Move the btrfs label ioctls up to the vfs for general use. > > > > This retains 256 chars as the maximum size through the interface, which > > is the btrfs limit and AFAIK exceeds any other filesystem's maximum > > label size. > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen > > Reviewed-by: Andreas Dilger > > Reviewed-by: David Sterba > > No objections (and it obviously ought to go through btrfs tree). I can take it through my tree, but Eric mentioned that there's a patch for xfs that depends on it. In this case it would make sense to take both patches at once via the xfs tree. There are no pending conflicting changes in btrfs.