Thread (3 messages) 3 messages, 3 authors, 2015-09-28

Re: [PATCH v2 10/9] copy_file_range.2: New page documenting copy_file_range()

From: Pádraig Brady <hidden>
Date: 2015-09-22 20:30:14
Also in: linux-btrfs, linux-fsdevel, linux-nfs

On 22/09/15 21:10, Anna Schumaker wrote:
On 09/14/2015 02:32 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
quoted
On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 09:50:18AM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
quoted
Hi Anna,
quoted
quoted
Furthermore, I even wonder if explicitly specifying flags as
COPY_FR_COPY | COPY_FR_REFLINK should just generate an EINVAL
error. 0 already gives us the behavior described above,
and allowing the combination COPY_FR_COPY | COPY_FR_REFLINK
perhaps just contributes to misleading the user that these
flags are orthogonal, when in reality they are not. What do
you think?
Personally, I think it's a little weird that one turns on reflink with a flag;
turns on regular copy with a different flag; and turns on both by not
specifying either flag. :)
Is there a better behavior for flags=0?  I was thinking this would be what people want when they don't care how the copy happens in the kernel.
As a user, I'm fine with this default and the interface in general.

thanks,
Pádraig.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help