On Mon, 27 Oct 2014 09:16:55 +0000, Filipe Manana wrote:
> If we couldn't find our extent item, we accessed the current slot
> (path->slots[0]) to check if it corresponds to an equivalent skinny
> metadata item. However this slot could be beyond our last item in the
> leaf (i.e. path->slots[0] >= btrfs_header_nritems(leaf)), in which case
> we shouldn't process it.
>
> Since btrfs_lookup_extent() is only used to find extent items for data
> extents, fix this by removing completely the logic that looks up for an
> equivalent skinny metadata item, since it can not exist.
I think we also need a better function name, such as btrfs_lookup_data_extent.
Thanks
Miao
>
> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 8 +-------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> index 0d599ba..9141b2b 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
> @@ -710,7 +710,7 @@ void btrfs_clear_space_info_full(struct btrfs_fs_info *info)
> rcu_read_unlock();
> }
>
> -/* simple helper to search for an existing extent at a given offset */
> +/* simple helper to search for an existing data extent at a given offset */
> int btrfs_lookup_extent(struct btrfs_root *root, u64 start, u64 len)
> {
> int ret;
> @@ -726,12 +726,6 @@ int btrfs_lookup_extent(struct btrfs_root *root, u64 start, u64 len)
> key.type = BTRFS_EXTENT_ITEM_KEY;
> ret = btrfs_search_slot(NULL, root->fs_info->extent_root, &key, path,
> 0, 0);
> - if (ret > 0) {
> - btrfs_item_key_to_cpu(path->nodes[0], &key, path->slots[0]);
> - if (key.objectid == start &&
> - key.type == BTRFS_METADATA_ITEM_KEY)
> - ret = 0;
> - }
> btrfs_free_path(path);
> return ret;
> }
>
--
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
