From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:38918 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751465AbbKIH7c (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Nov 2015 02:59:32 -0500 Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 23:59:26 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: david@fromorbit.com, fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Anna.Schumaker@netapp.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: [RFCv3 00/12] xfstests: test the btrfs/xfs reflink/dedupe ioctls Message-ID: <20151109075926.GB17974@infradead.org> References: <20151007051257.3260.73072.stgit@birch.djwong.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20151007051257.3260.73072.stgit@birch.djwong.org> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 10:12:57PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > * I don't have any interesting NFS/CIFS setups for test. :( I have a banrch with client and server support for NFSv4.2 CLONE support: http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/pnfs.git/shortlog/refs/heads/reflink+clone For now you want to use btrfs on the server, as using reflinks on XFS seems to be a little unstable over NFS. > If you're going to start using this mess, you probably ought to just > pull from my github trees for kernel[1], xfsprogs[2], and xfstests[3]. > They should just work with the btrfs that's in 4.3. > > Comments and questions are, as always, welcome. Any reason the groups are called clone? I don't really have an opinion on clone vs reflink but given that the xfs_io command is reflink I'd rather be consistent. Otherwise I'd say get it merged ASAP, we can still fix up various details later.