On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 3:25 AM, Naohiro Aota na...@elisp.net wrote:
The search key advancing condition used in copy_to_sk() is loose. It can
advance the key even if it reaches sk-max_*: e.g. when the max key = (512,
1024, -1) and the current key = (512, 1025, 10), it increments the
offset by
Hello, list.
Could any one take a look at on this? I believe this is a issue slowing
down ioctl(BTRFS_IOC_TREE_SEARCH) if the target key is missing.
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Naohiro Aota na...@elisp.net wrote:
The search key advancing condition used in copy_to_sk() is loose. It can
The search key advancing condition used in copy_to_sk() is loose. It can
advance the key even if it reaches sk-max_*: e.g. when the max key = (512,
1024, -1) and the current key = (512, 1025, 10), it increments the
offset by 1, continues hopeless search from (512, 1025, 11). This issue
make
