On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 03:36:22PM +0800, Peng Tao wrote: >> So the main change is .copy_file_range syscall. Was it rejected before >> or can we just push it forward as it is? > > It wasn't rejected, but we kept bikeshedding over the semantics insted > of moving it forward. > >> If there are objections against a new syscall, we can drop it and move >> on with vfs helper and the new copy_file_range file operation, in >> order to just make nfsd clone work. > > I think everyone wants the syscall, but people don't agree on the > semantics. For now maybe we should just add the method and move the > btrfs/xfs ioctl to common code. yeah, makes sense. -- 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
