From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:17443 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751257AbcITEkS (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 00:40:18 -0400 Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 21:39:42 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" Subject: Re: XFS reflink and development tip git trees updated Message-ID: <20160920043942.GE10172@birch.djwong.org> References: <20160905053317.GA15302@birch.djwong.org> <20160919161100.GA19849@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160919161100.GA19849@infradead.org> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Dave Chinner , Brian Foster , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 09:11:00AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Can you rebase (and repost the series) on top of the preparations > in for-next that Dave just pushed out? > > That should make reviewing a whole lot easier. I'm on vacation all week (in the desert with tcp-over-cactus) but I don't want the reflink review to stall, so here's a branch atop the for-next branch that Dave announced last night: https://github.com/djwong/linux/tree/for-dave-for-4.9-3 The scary parts are the rework that I had to do to integrate with hch's delalloc rewrite. I think all the changes to xfs_file_iomap_begin_delay are right (the regression tests all pass, at least) but it could use another set of eyes. No changes to the userland tools, they're still at: https://github.com/djwong/xfsprogs/tree/for-dave-for-4.9-2 --D