From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753814Ab3BULiK (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2013 06:38:10 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22249 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753717Ab3BULiE (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2013 06:38:04 -0500 Message-ID: <512606DF.5050706@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 12:37:03 +0100 From: Ric Wheeler User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130110 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linux FS Devel , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Chris L. Mason" , Christoph Hellwig , Alexander Viro , "Martin K. Petersen" , Hannes Reinecke Subject: New copyfile system call - discuss before LSF? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org We have debated the need to have a system call to allow for offloading copy operations, for example to an NFS server (part to the new NFS 4.2 specification), SCSI target device (two different SCSI commands do this), local file systems (reflink, etc) and I suspect many other possible parts of the stack could implement this. The earliest discussion of such a system call I saw happened back in 2001, I know we had another more recent flurry (2-3 years back?) as well that got tangled up and died away. Given the new popularity of this in storage devices and the use case for virt guests, any chance to get a proposal floated this year that might be able to land upstream in our life times :) ? Ric