On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The way the array based offload (and some software side reflink works) is > not a byte by byte copy. We cannot assume that a valid count can be returned > or that such a count would be an indication of a sequential segment of good > data. The whole thing would normally have to be reissued. > > To make that a true assumption, you would have to mandate that in each of > the specifications (and sw targets)... You're missing my point. - user issues SIZE_MAX splice request - fs issues *64M* (or whatever) request to offload - when that completes *fully* then we return 64M to userspace - if it completes partially, then we return an error to userspace Again, wouldn't that work? Thanks, Miklos -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
