Return-Path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:33994 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759432AbbLCKah (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Dec 2015 05:30:37 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 11:30:35 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Steve French Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Al Viro , Peng Tao , Jeffrey Layton , linux-fsdevel , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: vfs: move btrfs clone ioctls to common code Message-ID: <20151203103035.GA15996@lst.de> References: <1448563859-21922-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20151202072757.GB15839@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:40:13AM -0600, Steve French wrote: > If the copy_file_range is allowed to use any offload mechanism then > cifs.ko could be changed as follows, to fallback among the three > possible mechanisms depending on what the target supports. How reliable are the fallbacks? E.g. for clones we usually have alignment restrictions that we'd need to communicate back, and cifs currently doesn't have client side checks for those.