2009/8/20 Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>: > On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 10:59:07AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 19 2009, Nick Piggin wrote: >> > On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 10:46:59AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: >> > > On Wed, Aug 19 2009, Nick Piggin wrote: >> > > > See my other reply. It *can* work with key aliases, but this particular >> > > > code does not. >> > > > >> > > > It is pretty easy obviously to put in duplicates because the rbtree >> > > > code doesn't know about keys, but if we do this then it looks like >> > > > it might cause the search code to miss some valid inodes and instead >> > > > return freeing inodes -- so you'd also have to look at that and update >> > > > it which is why I didn't go down this route.. >> > > >> > > Mine was just a generic statement, I didn't read the btrfs code (hence >> > > my comment about potential lookup bug, if you allow aliases you have to >> > > be careful). >> > >> > Ah ok. Well yeah in this case btrfs is definitely wrong in the way it >> > tried to insert aliases. >> >> I looked at the actual problem now and I agree, it cannot work that way. >> I don't know if Linus is planning another -rc, we should probably get >> this upstream sooner rather than later. Chris is away this week, so if >> we can get Yan to agree on this patch as well, I'll submit it. > I think the first patch I submitted was agreed? > Of course, thank you. Yan, Zheng -- 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
