fs: try to clone files first in vfs_copy_file_range

A clone is a perfectly fine implementation of a file copy, so most
file systems just implement the copy that way.  Instead of duplicating
this logic move it to the VFS.  Currently btrfs and XFS implement copies
the same way as clones and there is no behavior change for them, cifs
only implements clones and grow support for copy_file_range with this
patch.  NFS implements both, so this will allow copy_file_range to work
on servers that only implement CLONE and be lot more efficient on servers
that implements CLONE and COPY.

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

1 files changed, 22 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/fs/read_write.c b/fs/read_write.c
index 190e0d362581..6674a4b83c54 100644
--- a/fs/read_write.c
+++ b/fs/read_write.c
@@ -1542,20 +1542,37 @@ ssize_t vfs_copy_file_range(struct file *file_in, loff_t pos_in,
 	if (ret)
 		return ret;
 
-	ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
-	if (file_out->f_op->copy_file_range)
+	/*
+	 * Try cloning first, this is supported by more file systems, and
+	 * more efficient if both clone and copy are supported (e.g. NFS).
+	 */
+	if (file_in->f_op->clone_file_range) {
+		ret = file_in->f_op->clone_file_range(file_in, pos_in,
+				file_out, pos_out, len);
+		if (ret == 0) {
+			ret = len;
+			goto done;
+		}
+	}
+
+	if (file_out->f_op->copy_file_range) {
 		ret = file_out->f_op->copy_file_range(file_in, pos_in, file_out,
 						      pos_out, len, flags);
-	if (ret == -EOPNOTSUPP)
-		ret = do_splice_direct(file_in, &pos_in, file_out, &pos_out,
-				len > MAX_RW_COUNT ? MAX_RW_COUNT : len, 0);
+		if (ret != -EOPNOTSUPP)
+			goto done;
+	}
 
+	ret = do_splice_direct(file_in, &pos_in, file_out, &pos_out,
+			len > MAX_RW_COUNT ? MAX_RW_COUNT : len, 0);
+
+done:
 	if (ret > 0) {
 		fsnotify_access(file_in);
 		add_rchar(current, ret);
 		fsnotify_modify(file_out);
 		add_wchar(current, ret);
 	}
+
 	inc_syscr(current);
 	inc_syscw(current);