Return-Path: Received: from mail-ie0-f172.google.com ([209.85.223.172]:35058 "EHLO mail-ie0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750900AbbGMHyI (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jul 2015 03:54:08 -0400 Received: by iecuq6 with SMTP id uq6so229775048iec.2 for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 00:54:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150713074139.GB23338@infradead.org> References: <1436766655-10696-1-git-send-email-tao.peng@primarydata.com> <20150713065851.GD26245@infradead.org> <20150713074139.GB23338@infradead.org> From: Peng Tao Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 15:53:48 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] nfs: minor cleanups and NFSv42 CLONE support To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Linux NFS Mailing List , Trond Myklebust , Anna Schumaker , Zach Brown , "Darrick J. Wong" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 03:36:22PM +0800, Peng Tao wrote: >> So the main change is .copy_file_range syscall. Was it rejected before >> or can we just push it forward as it is? > > It wasn't rejected, but we kept bikeshedding over the semantics insted > of moving it forward. > >> If there are objections against a new syscall, we can drop it and move >> on with vfs helper and the new copy_file_range file operation, in >> order to just make nfsd clone work. > > I think everyone wants the syscall, but people don't agree on the > semantics. For now maybe we should just add the method and move the > btrfs/xfs ioctl to common code. yeah, makes sense.