On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 04:23:56PM +0100, Gerhard Heift wrote: > This patch series first rewrites tree_search to copy found items directly to > userspace and then adds a new ioctl TREE_SEARCH_V2 with which we could store > them in a varying buffer. Now even items larger than 3992 bytes or a large > amount of items can be returned. This is the case for some EXTENT_CSUM items, > which could have a size up to 16k. > Should we limit the buffer size? > * David suggested [1] a minimum of 64k, I've chosen a cap of 16M. Well, 64M is a lot, but as it's only an upper limit, ok. I have scrolled through the patches, overall i looks ok, can IMO go into btrfs-next, but more testing is obviously needed. I'll stick a reviewed-by once I give it a bit of testing myself. thanks, david -- 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
