On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 03:15:56PM +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: > Hello, > > This is v3 of the patch. > > We can trigger BUG() in xfs_seek_data() if met two unwritten without data or hole extents at last version. > So making the extents map reading in loop could solve it. > > Sorry, Am not yet try the repeated holes scenario according to Dave's comments as lack of X64 test env, still > waiting for it ready. But this patch is already too long delayed, I have worked it out one weeks ago. > So I'd like to post it because of it could handle repeated hole/unwritten extents well in a loop, and I also improved > xfstests:286 with those cases for the verification, will post it soon. > > v2->v3: > Tested by Mark, hit BUG() for continuous unwritten extents without data wrote. > * xfs_seek_data(), remove BUG() and having extents map search in loop. The patch looks good. But as question by Mark I wonder if it's a good idea to just improve xfs_seek_data, but not xfs_seek_hole. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
