Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 29 Mar 2006 22:42:17 +0200 | From | Jens Axboe <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH][RFC] splice support |
| |
On Wed, Mar 29 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > > 1) What are the consequences of doing > > > > if (f_op->splice_write) > > f_op->splice_write(...); > > else > > generic_file_splice_write(...); > > > > to cause sys_splice() to default to supported? > > I'd actually much prefer a number of filesystems just adding he > "generic_file_splice_write()" thing. If it works for them (and it usually > will), it's a one-liner. And it won't do wrong things on filesystems that > have special rules (inode re-validate for networked filesystems etc). > > > 2) Do you really have to test f_op itself for NULL? Is that a stealth > > closed-file check or something? I would be surprised if f_op was ever really > > NULL. > > Hmm.. I agree that f_op probably should never be NULL (a struct file with > a NULL f_op is pretty useless), but it is a test that we historically have > had. So it's probably best to keep for consistency, and if somebody wants > to, they can clean up all the other tests too (in the read/write/lseek > paths). > > I'm inclined to apply this patch (well, I'd like the fixed one). The whole > splice() thing has been rolling around in my head for years, and the pipe > support infrastructure for it has been around for over a year now in > preparation for this. > > And the patch actually looks pretty clean to me.
Go ahead, as mentioned there are a few little extra fixes in the git repo. The remaining changes I had in mind don't require anything massive, so...
-- Jens Axboe
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |