From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?Q?P=c3=a1draig_Brady?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/9] copy_file_range.2: New page documenting copy_file_range() Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 21:30:03 +0100 Message-ID: <5601BA4B.9060709@draigBrady.com> References: <1442003423-6884-1-git-send-email-Anna.Schumaker@Netapp.com> <1442003423-6884-11-git-send-email-Anna.Schumaker@Netapp.com> <55F52ABA.9070908@gmail.com> <20150914183223.GA28469@birch.djwong.org> <5601B5C7.7030704@Netapp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5601B5C7.7030704@Netapp.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Anna Schumaker , "Darrick J. Wong" , "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, zab@zabbo.net, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, clm@fb.com, andros@netapp.com, hch@infradead.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On 22/09/15 21:10, Anna Schumaker wrote: > On 09/14/2015 02:32 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 09:50:18AM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages= ) wrote: >>> Hi Anna, >>> Furthermore, I even wonder if explicitly specifying flags as >>> COPY_FR_COPY | COPY_FR_REFLINK should just generate an EINVAL >>> error. 0 already gives us the behavior described above, >>> and allowing the combination COPY_FR_COPY | COPY_FR_REFLINK >>> perhaps just contributes to misleading the user that these >>> flags are orthogonal, when in reality they are not. What do >>> you think? >> >> Personally, I think it's a little weird that one turns on reflink wi= th a flag; >> turns on regular copy with a different flag; and turns on both by no= t >> specifying either flag. :) >=20 > Is there a better behavior for flags=3D0? I was thinking this would = be what people want when they don't care how the copy happens in the ke= rnel. As a user, I'm fine with this default and the interface in general. thanks, P=C3=A1draig. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel= " in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail2.vodafone.ie ([213.233.128.44]:13544 "EHLO mail2.vodafone.ie" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934588AbbIVUaO (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:30:14 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/9] copy_file_range.2: New page documenting copy_file_range() To: Anna Schumaker , "Darrick J. Wong" , "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" References: <1442003423-6884-1-git-send-email-Anna.Schumaker@Netapp.com> <1442003423-6884-11-git-send-email-Anna.Schumaker@Netapp.com> <55F52ABA.9070908@gmail.com> <20150914183223.GA28469@birch.djwong.org> <5601B5C7.7030704@Netapp.com> Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, zab@zabbo.net, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, clm@fb.com, andros@netapp.com, hch@infradead.org From: =?UTF-8?Q?P=c3=a1draig_Brady?= Message-ID: <5601BA4B.9060709@draigBrady.com> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 21:30:03 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5601B5C7.7030704@Netapp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 22/09/15 21:10, Anna Schumaker wrote: > On 09/14/2015 02:32 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 09:50:18AM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: >>> Hi Anna, >>> Furthermore, I even wonder if explicitly specifying flags as >>> COPY_FR_COPY | COPY_FR_REFLINK should just generate an EINVAL >>> error. 0 already gives us the behavior described above, >>> and allowing the combination COPY_FR_COPY | COPY_FR_REFLINK >>> perhaps just contributes to misleading the user that these >>> flags are orthogonal, when in reality they are not. What do >>> you think? >> >> Personally, I think it's a little weird that one turns on reflink with a flag; >> turns on regular copy with a different flag; and turns on both by not >> specifying either flag. :) > > Is there a better behavior for flags=0? I was thinking this would be what people want when they don't care how the copy happens in the kernel. As a user, I'm fine with this default and the interface in general. thanks, Pádraig.