On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Filipe David Borba Manana
<fdmanana@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If we did a tree search with the goal to find a metadata item
> but the search failed with return value 1, we attempt to see
> if in the same leaf there's a corresponding extent item, and if
> there's one, just use it instead of doing another tree search
> for this extent item. The check in the leaf was wrong because
> it was seeking for a metadata item instead of an extent item.
>
> This optimization was also being triggered incorrectly, as it
> was evaluating path->slots which always evaluates to true. The
> goal was to see if the leaf level slot was greater than zero
> (i.e. not the first item in the leaf).
>
> Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> extent-tree.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/extent-tree.c b/extent-tree.c
> index b0cfe0a..22e6247 100644
> --- a/extent-tree.c
> +++ b/extent-tree.c
> @@ -1515,12 +1515,13 @@ again:
> * to make sure.
> */
> if (ret > 0 && metadata) {
> - if (path->slots) {
> + if (path->slots[0]) {
> path->slots[0]--;
> btrfs_item_key_to_cpu(path->nodes[0], &key,
> path->slots[0]);
> if (key.objectid == bytenr &&
> - key.type == BTRFS_METADATA_ITEM_KEY)
> + key.type == BTRFS_EXTENT_ITEM_KEY &&
> + key.offset == root->leafsize)
> ret = 0;
> }
>
> --
> 1.7.9.5
>
Josef, since git suggests you are the author of this code piece, can
you please review this and comment?
Thanks.
--
Filipe David Manana,
"Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world.
Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves.
That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
--
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
