On 2019/12/18 5:52 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2019/12/18 下午1:18, damenly.su@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Su Yue <Damenly_Su@xxxxxxx>
The are different behavior of btrfs_lookup_first_block_group() and
btrfs_lookup_first_block_group_kernel().
There are many palaces calling the lookup function include extent
allocation part. It's too complicated to check and change those.
It will influence many functionalities in progs.
So here, just make kernel version lookup functions run likely in
progs behavior.
Signed-off-by: Su Yue <Damenly_Su@xxxxxxx>
It should be folded into previous commit, or this will break bisect.
Oh, will do.
Thanks for your review.
Thanks,
Qu
---
extent-tree.c | 7 ++++---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/extent-tree.c b/extent-tree.c
index fdfa29a2409f..3f7b82dc88a2 100644
--- a/extent-tree.c
+++ b/extent-tree.c
@@ -238,12 +238,13 @@ static struct btrfs_block_group_cache *block_group_cache_tree_search(
}
/*
- * Return the block group that starts at or after bytenr
+ * Return the block group that contains @bytenr, otherwise return the next one
+ * that starts after @bytenr
*/
struct btrfs_block_group_cache *btrfs_lookup_first_block_group_kernel(
struct btrfs_fs_info *info, u64 bytenr)
{
- return block_group_cache_tree_search(info, bytenr, 0);
+ return block_group_cache_tree_search(info, bytenr, 1);
}
/*
@@ -252,7 +253,7 @@ struct btrfs_block_group_cache *btrfs_lookup_first_block_group_kernel(
struct btrfs_block_group_cache *btrfs_lookup_block_group_kernel(
struct btrfs_fs_info *info, u64 bytenr)
{
- return block_group_cache_tree_search(info, bytenr, 1);
+ return block_group_cache_tree_search(info, bytenr, 0);
}
/*
