search for: tlv_put_u64

...; + + p = fs_path_alloc(sctx); + if (!p) + return -ENOMEM; + + ret = begin_cmd(sctx, BTRFS_SEND_C_UPDATE_EXTENT); + if (ret < 0) + goto out; + + ret = get_cur_path(sctx, sctx->cur_ino, sctx->cur_inode_gen, p); + if (ret < 0) + goto out; + + TLV_PUT_PATH(sctx, BTRFS_SEND_A_PATH, p); + TLV_PUT_U64(sctx, BTRFS_SEND_A_FILE_OFFSET, offset); + TLV_PUT_U64(sctx, BTRFS_SEND_A_SIZE, len); + + ret = send_cmd(sctx); + +tlv_put_failure: +out: + fs_path_free(sctx, p); + return ret; +} + static int send_write_or_clone(struct send_ctx *sctx, struct btrfs_path *path, struct btrfs_ke...

First two patches are trivial cleanups that I''ve spotted while reading send.c, can be applied independently. The third patch contains the important bits, safety checks that the subvolumes involved in send do not accidentally lose the RO status. I haven''t seen this documented anywhere that this is mandatory, implied from how I assume send works. Please let me know if this is

...< end) { + len = min_t(u64, end - offset, BTRFS_SEND_READ_SIZE); + + ret = begin_cmd(sctx, BTRFS_SEND_C_WRITE); + if (ret < 0) + break; + ret = get_cur_path(sctx, sctx->cur_ino, sctx->cur_inode_gen, p); + if (ret < 0) + break; + TLV_PUT_PATH(sctx, BTRFS_SEND_A_PATH, p); + TLV_PUT_U64(sctx, BTRFS_SEND_A_FILE_OFFSET, offset); + TLV_PUT(sctx, BTRFS_SEND_A_DATA, sctx->read_buf, len); + ret = send_cmd(sctx); + if (ret < 0) + break; + offset += len; + } +tlv_put_failure: +out: + fs_path_free(p); + return ret; +} + static int send_write_or_clone(struct send_ctx *sctx,...