On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 09:12:31AM -0500, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
>* Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@xxxxxxxxx> [241118 21:10]:
>> On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 03:49:55PM -0500, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
>> >* Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@xxxxxxxxx> [241115 20:48]:
>> >> Empty tree and single entry tree is handled else whether, so the maple
>> >> tree here must be a tree with nodes.
>> >>
>> >> If the height is 1 and we found the gap, it will jump to *done* since it
>> >> is also a leaf.
>> >> If the height is more than one, and there may be an available range, we
>> >> will descend the tree, which is not root anymore.
>> >>
>> >> If there is no available range, we will set error and return.
>> >
>> >Isn't this needed for the overflow case? That is, if there is a range
>> >that ends at ULONG_MAX, then we will break from the loop on the offset
>> >limit, but not check for root, return false, and continue to loop.
>> >
>>
>> I may not follow you correctly.
>>
>> If there is an available range that ends at ULONG_MAX for a root node, we
>> break the loop with two conditions:
>>
>> * the root node is a leaf node, then we will set found to true
>> * the root node has children, then descend to a non-root node
>>
>> Not sure this is the case you mentioned.
>
>I am concerned of the case where there isn't a gap in the last slot of a
>leaf root node. Examining it, I think we are okay.
>
>next_slot:
> min = pivot + 1; <-----min = 0, overflow.
Oh, this overflow.
> if (mas->last <= pivot) { <-- still okay.
> mas_set_err(mas, -EBUSY);
> return true;
> }
Thanks.
So it looks good to you ?
--
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me
