On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 4:01 PM, David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 11:33:40PM +0800, Peng Tao wrote: >> --- a/include/uapi/linux/btrfs.h >> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/btrfs.h >> @@ -316,12 +316,6 @@ struct btrfs_ioctl_search_args_v2 { >> __u64 buf[0]; /* out - found items */ >> }; >> >> -struct btrfs_ioctl_clone_range_args { >> - __s64 src_fd; >> - __u64 src_offset, src_length; >> - __u64 dest_offset; >> -}; > > For backward compatibility and not-breaking-builds reasons, do not > remove anything from this file. > Got you. I'll keep it unchanged in the next version. >> - >> /* flags for the defrag range ioctl */ >> #define BTRFS_DEFRAG_RANGE_COMPRESS 1 >> #define BTRFS_DEFRAG_RANGE_START_IO 2 >> @@ -548,7 +542,6 @@ static inline char *btrfs_err_str(enum btrfs_err_code err_code) >> #define BTRFS_IOC_TRANS_END _IO(BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 7) >> #define BTRFS_IOC_SYNC _IO(BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 8) >> >> -#define BTRFS_IOC_CLONE _IOW(BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 9, int) > > The ioctl definition reuses the BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC (0x94), which is IMHO > wrong. > I thought it breaks ABI if we choose a different value for the type field of the ioctl. Am I misunderstanding it? Thanks, Tao -- 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