On 05/04/2011 03:31 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 04 May 2011 13:58:39 EDT, Josef Bacik said:
+#define SEEK_HOLE 3 /* seek to the closest hole */
+#define SEEK_DATA 4 /* seek to the closest data */
Comments here need nearest/next fixing as well - otherwise the ext[34] crew may
actually implement the commented semantics. ;)
Balls, thanks I'll fix that.
Other than that, patch 1/2 looks OK to me (not that there's much code to
review), and 2/2 *seems* sane and implement the "next" semantics, though I only
examined the while/if structure and am assuming the btrfs innards are done
correctly. In particular, that 'while (1)' looks like it can be painful for a
sufficiently large and fragmented file (think a gigabyte file in 4K chunks,
producing a million extents), but I'll let a btrfs expert analyse that
performance issue ;)
Heh well we do while (1) in btrfs _everywhere_, so this isn't anything
new, tho I should probably throw a cond_resched() in there. Thanks,
Josef
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
