On 8/1/12 10:17 AM, Peter Watkins wrote:
> Hello,
>
> If you have a moment would you be kind enough to review the test case
> and patch below?
>
> I ran into this while using xfs_db to dump extents for a large,
> fragmented file. The extents were stored in btree form.
The xfs_db change looks right. Way back when, commit
b3563c19992d0453db1826ffdbf0be6039998023 did this:
@@ -91,29 +91,27 @@ bmap(
bno = NULLFSBLOCK;
rblock = (xfs_bmdr_block_t *)XFS_DFORK_PTR(dip, whichfork);
fsize = XFS_DFORK_SIZE(dip, mp, whichfork);
- pp = XFS_BTREE_PTR_ADDR(xfs_bmdr, rblock, 1,
- XFS_BTREE_BLOCK_MAXRECS(fsize, xfs_bmdr, 0));
- kp = XFS_BTREE_KEY_ADDR(xfs_bmdr, rblock, 1);
+ pp = XFS_BMDR_PTR_ADDR(rblock, 1, xfs_bmdr_maxrecs(mp, fsize, 0));
+ kp = XFS_BMDR_KEY_ADDR(rblock, 1);
bno = select_child(curoffset, kp, pp,
be16_to_cpu(rblock->bb_numrecs));
for (;;) {
set_cur(&typtab[typ], XFS_FSB_TO_DADDR(mp, bno),
blkbb, DB_RING_IGN, NULL);
- block = (xfs_bmbt_block_t *)iocur_top->data;
+ block = (struct xfs_btree_block *)iocur_top->data;
if (be16_to_cpu(block->bb_level) == 0)
break;
- pp = XFS_BTREE_PTR_ADDR(xfs_bmbt, block, 1,
- XFS_BTREE_BLOCK_MAXRECS(mp->m_sb.sb_blocksize,
- xfs_bmbt, 0));
- kp = XFS_BTREE_KEY_ADDR(xfs_bmbt, block, 1);
+ pp = XFS_BMDR_PTR_ADDR(block, 1,
+ xfs_bmbt_maxrecs(mp, mp->m_sb.sb_blocksize, 0));
+ kp = XFS_BMDR_KEY_ADDR(block, 1);
as part of a kernel<->userspace syncup. But you can see that some "bmdt's"
turned into "bmdr's" along the way. Surprised that hasn't been found sooner!
I wonder if there's a way to make to make a testcase which a) doesn't require
256k of "good" output, and b) more robust to failure (a timeout & kill might
let it proceed...)
-Eric
> -Peter
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
>
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
