On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:22:52AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > At 07/15/2016 09:40 AM, Liu Bo wrote: > > I have a valid btrfs image which contains, > > ... > > item 10 key (1103101952 BLOCK_GROUP_ITEM 1288372224) itemoff 15947 itemsize 24 > > block group used 655360 chunk_objectid 256 flags DATA|RAID5 > > item 11 key (1103364096 EXTENT_ITEM 131072) itemoff 15894 itemsize 53 > > extent refs 1 gen 11 flags DATA > > extent data backref root 5 objectid 258 offset 0 count 1 > > item 12 key (1103888384 EXTENT_ITEM 262144) itemoff 15841 itemsize 53 > > extent refs 1 gen 15 flags DATA > > extent data backref root 1 objectid 256 offset 0 count 1 > > item 13 key (1104281600 EXTENT_ITEM 262144) itemoff 15788 itemsize 53 > > extent refs 1 gen 15 flags DATA > > extent data backref root 1 objectid 257 offset 0 count 1 > > ... > > > > The extent [1103364096, 131072) has length 131072, but if we run > > > > "btrfs-map-logical -l 1103364096 -b $((65536 * 3)) /dev/sda" > > > > it will return mapping info 's of non-existing extents. > > > > It's because it assumes that extents's are contiguous on logical address, > > when it's not true, after one loop (cur_logical += cur_len) and mapping > > the next extent, we can get an extent that is out of our search range and > > we end up with a negative @real_len and printing all mapping infos till > > the disk end. > > > > Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Applied, thanks. -- 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
