From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21FF7D8 for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2023 00:38:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 8333568AFE; Mon, 4 Dec 2023 09:38:49 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 09:38:49 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Amir Goldstein Cc: Christian Brauner , Jeff Layton , Josef Bacik , Christoph Hellwig , Jan Kara , David Howells , Jens Axboe , Miklos Szeredi , Al Viro , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] fs: fork splice_file_range() from do_splice_direct() Message-ID: <20231204083849.GC32438@lst.de> References: <20231130141624.3338942-1-amir73il@gmail.com> <20231130141624.3338942-2-amir73il@gmail.com> <20231204083733.GA32438@lst.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231204083733.GA32438@lst.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 09:37:33AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > put_rd_wr_caps(src_ci, src_got, dst_ci, dst_got); > > - ret = do_splice_direct(src_file, &src_off, dst_file, > > - &dst_off, src_objlen, flags); > > + ret = splice_file_range(src_file, &src_off, dst_file, &dst_off, > > + src_objlen); > > Shouldb't ceph be switched to use generic_copy_file_range? > That does the capping of the size which we want, and doesn't update > the file offsets, which would require recalculation in the ceph code. > > But this could avoid another exported API as splice_file_range could > simply be folded into generic_copy_file_range which should reduce > confusion. And splice really is a mess for so many different layers > of the onion being exposed. I've been wanting to reduce some of that > for a while but haven't found a really nice way yet. (and generic_copy_file_range really should be renamed to splice_copy_file_range and moved to splice.c)