From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45D987CA1 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2016 09:56:31 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B84C304032 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2016 07:56:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id VU3pfBcduJRQ7eic (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 05 Sep 2016 07:56:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 07:56:22 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] vfs: support FS_XFLAG_REFLINK and FS_XFLAG_COWEXTSIZE Message-ID: <20160905145622.GB7662@infradead.org> References: <147216784041.525.7722906502172299465.stgit@birch.djwong.org> <147216786073.525.16014208838990530622.stgit@birch.djwong.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <147216786073.525.16014208838990530622.stgit@birch.djwong.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: linux-api@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 04:31:00PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > Introduce XFLAGs for the new XFS reflink inode flag and the CoW extent > size hint, and actually plumb the CoW extent size hint into the fsxattr > structure. Just curious, but why would we even bother to expose the reflink flag to userspace? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs