On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 10:35:46AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 05:08:32PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Back when the XFS reflink code only supported clone_file_range, we were
> > only able to return zero or negative error codes to userspace. However,
> > now that copy_file_range (which returns bytes copied) can use XFS'
> > clone_file_range, we have the opportunity to return partial results.
> > For example, if userspace sends a 1GB clone request and we run out of
> > space halfway through, we at least can tell userspace that we completed
> > 512M of that request like a regular write.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/xfs/xfs_file.c | 5 +----
> > fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.c | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
> > fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.h | 2 +-
> > 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> > index bc9e94bcb7a3..b2b15b8dc4a1 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
> > @@ -928,14 +928,11 @@ xfs_file_remap_range(
> > loff_t len,
> > unsigned int remap_flags)
> > {
> > - int ret;
> > -
> > if (!remap_check_flags(remap_flags, RFR_SAME_DATA))
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > - ret = xfs_reflink_remap_range(file_in, pos_in, file_out, pos_out,
> > + return xfs_reflink_remap_range(file_in, pos_in, file_out, pos_out,
> > len, remap_flags);
>
> Is there any reason not to merge xfs_file_remap_range and
> xfs_reflink_remap_range at this point?
Yeah, that seems like a good idea to me - pulling all the
vfs/generic code interactions back up into xfs_file.c would match
how the rest of the file operations are layered w.r.t. external and
internal XFS code...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
