Re: [Findutils-patches] [PATCH] find memory leak

[Dale R. Worley]

Bernhard Voelker <address@hidden> writes:
> I don't know more about btrfs and this may sound like a crazy idea,
> but it would maybe help quite some tools if btrfs would implicitly
> add an entry to mountinfo for each subvolume/snapshot to avoid such
> virtual device numbers ... which works e.g. if the admin creates a
> bind mount for the subvolume to itself (example cont'd):

I agree with Bernhard that btrfs is basically breaking the specification
of /proc/mountinfo.

Bernhard's suggestion would fix the problem.  Or perhaps the inode
returned in stat() could contain a field to contain the snapshot
identifier along with the "base" i-node number.  (I guess we know the
snapshot identifiers don't exceed 255!)

Dale