From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 8/9] vfs: Add vfs_copy_file_range() support for pagecache copies Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:27:01 -0700 Message-ID: <20151014182701.GC31225@infradead.org> References: <1443634014-3026-1-git-send-email-Anna.Schumaker@Netapp.com> <1443634014-3026-9-git-send-email-Anna.Schumaker@Netapp.com> <20151011142203.GA31867@infradead.org> <20151012231749.GC11398@birch.djwong.org> <561E980C.9010509@Netapp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Anna Schumaker , Christoph Hellwig , "Darrick J. Wong" , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Linux btrfs Developers List , Linux FS Devel , Linux API , Zach Brown , Al Viro , Chris Mason , Michael Kerrisk-manpages , andros@netapp.com List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:08:40AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > So what I'm hearing is that I should drop the reflink and dedup flags and change this system call only perform a full copy (with preserving of sparseness), correct? I can make those changes, but only if everybody is in agreement that it's the best way forward. > > I personally rather like the reflink option. That thing is quite useful. reflink is very useful, probably more useful than the copy actually. But it is different from a copy. It should be a separate interface.