[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5249DA50.5060105@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 16:08:48 -0400
From: Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@...hat.com>
To: Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@...m.fraunhofer.de>
CC: "Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Zach Brown <zab@...hat.com>,
Anna Schumaker <schumaker.anna@...il.com>,
Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"Schumaker, Bryan" <Bryan.Schumaker@...app.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <mkp@....net>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@...e.com>,
Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>,
Eric Wong <normalperson@...t.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] extending splice for copy offloading
On 09/30/2013 04:00 PM, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> pNFS, FhGFS, Lustre, Ceph, etc., all of them shall implement their own
> interface? And userspace needs to address all of them differently?
The NFS and SCSI groups have each defined a standard which Zach's proposal
abstracts into a common user API.
Distributed file systems tend to be rather unique and do not have similar
standard bodies, but a lot of them could hide server specific implementations
under the current proposed interfaces.
What is not a good idea is to drag out the core, simple copy offload discussion
for another 5 years to pull in every odd use case :)
ric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists