Doesn't the new syscall have to invalidate the page cache pages that the server is about to overwrite as btrfs does with the following line in fs/btrfs/ioctl.c truncate_inode_pages_range(&inode->i_data, destoff, PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(destoff + len) - 1); (and doesn't truncate_inode_pages_range handle page cache alignment anyway - and also why did btrfs use truncate_inode_pages_range instead of invalidate?) Does nfs client ever have the case where two different superblocks map to the same nfs export (and thus the check below is restricting the ability to do server side copy)? + if (inode_in->i_sb != inode_out->i_sb || + file_in->f_path.mnt != file_out->f_path.mnt) + return -EXDEV; I am working on cifs client patches for the ioctl, and the new syscall also looks pretty easy. Some popular cifs servers (like Windows) have supported smb/cifs copy offload for many, many years - and now Samba with the support that David Disseldorp added for the clone range ioctl has been supporting copychunk (server side copy from Windows to Samba) so about time to finish the cifs client equivalent. -- Thanks, Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
