Hi All, As David hasn't got back to me I'm guessing that he is too busy with other things at present. If anyone else is able to spare the time to review my patch and give me feedback that would be very much appreciated. Many Thanks, Matt On 3 March 2015 at 00:27, Zygo Blaxell <ce3g8jdj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I second this. I've seen the same behavior. > > Clone seems to have evolved a little further than extent-same knows about. > e.g. there is code in the extent-same ioctl that tries to avoid doing > a clone from within one inode to elsewhere in the same inode; however, > the clone ioctl (which extent-same calls) has no such restriction. > > As Matt mentioned, clone_range seems quite happy to accept a partial block > at EOF. cp --reflink would be much harder to use if it did not. > > On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 08:59:11PM +0000, Matt Robinson wrote: > > Hi David, > > > > Have you had a chance to look at this? Am very happy to answer > > further questions, adjust my implementation, provide a different kind > > of test case, etc. > > > > Many Thanks, > > > > Matt -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
