# Re: \[RFC -next 00/10\] Add ZC notifications to splice and sendfile

- From: Stefan Metzmacher \<metze@samba.org\>
- Date: 2025-03-21 07:56:08 
- List: netdev
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/netdev/2025/03/307638
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/netdev/2025/03/307339/t.md

```text
Am 20.03.25 um 11:46 schrieb Pavel Begunkov:
> On 3/19/25 19:15, Stefan Metzmacher wrote:
>> Am 19.03.25 um 19:37 schrieb Jens Axboe:
>>> On 3/19/25 11:45 AM, Joe Damato wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 11:20:50AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> ...
>>> My argument would be the same as for other features - if you can do it
>>> simpler this other way, why not consider that? The end result would be
>>> the same, you can do fast sendfile() with sane buffer reuse. But the
>>> kernel side would be simpler, which is always a kernel main goal for
>>> those of us that have to maintain it.
>>>
>>> Just adding sendfile2() works in the sense that it's an easier drop in
>>> replacement for an app, though the error queue side does mean it needs
>>> to change anyway - it's not just replacing one syscall with another. And
>>> if we want to be lazy, sure that's fine. I just don't think it's the
>>> best way to do it when we literally have a mechanism that's designed for
>>> this and works with reuse already with normal send zc (and receive side
>>> too, in the next kernel).
>>
>> A few month (or even years) back, Pavel came up with an idea
>> to implement some kind of splice into a fixed buffer, if that
>> would be implemented I guess it would help me in Samba too.
>> My first usage was on the receive side (from the network).
>
> I did it as a testing ground for infra needed for ublk zerocopy,
> but if that's of interest I can resurrect the patches and see
> where it goes, especially since the aforementioned infra just got
> queued.

Would be great!

Have you posted the work in progress somewhere?

Thanks!
metze

```