On 09/11/2013 04:17:23 PM, Eric Wong wrote:
Zach Brown <zab@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Towards the end of that thread Eric Wong asked why we didn't just
> extend splice. I immediately replied with some dumb dismissive
> answer. Once I sat down and looked at it, though, it does make a
> lot of sense. So good job, Eric. +10 Dummie points for me.
Thanks for revisiting that :>
> Some things to talk about:
> - I really don't care about the naming here. If you do, holler.
Exposing "DIRECT" to userspace now might confuse users into expecting
O_DIRECT behavior. I say this as an easily-confused user.
In the future, perhaps O_DIRECT behavior can become per-splice
(instead
of just per-open) and can save SPLICE_F_DIRECT for that.
> - We might want different flags for file-to-file splicing and
acceleration
> - We might want flags to require or forbid acceleration
> - We might want to provide all these flags to sendfile, too
Another syscall? I prefer not. Better to just maintain the sendfile
API as-is for compatibility reasons and nudge users towards splice.
> Thoughts? Objections?
I'll try to test/comment more in a week or two (not much time for
computing until then).
Just a vague note that I've wanted to use splice implementing cp and
patch and cat and so on in toybox, but couldn't because it needs a pipe.
So I'm quite interested in moves to lift this restriction...
Rob--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
