On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 11:54:08AM -0700, Zach Brown wrote: > Is this relying on btrfs range cloning being atomic? It certainly > doesn't look atomic. It can modify items across an arbitrarily large > number of leaf blocks. It can make the changes across multiple > transactions which could introduce partial modification on reboot after > crashes. It can fail (the dynamic duo: enomem, eio) and leave the > desintation partially modified. I didn't mean atomic in the failure atomic sense, but in the sense of being atomic vs other writes, similar to how Posix specifies it for writes vs other writes. Guess I need to express this intent better. -- 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
